https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2269 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2269 --- Comment #2 from Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; 2012-04-11 21:54:56 CEST --- Ok, quick spec review... 1. Unless we're going to build for EL5 the following can (at your preference) be removed: BuildRoot: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %install %clean %defattr(-,root,root,-) in %files 2. devel sub-package should be arch dependent, i.e.: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} 3. Completely optional. It was suggested to me once that for out of source builds this is more elegant: %build rm -rf <builddir> && mkdir <builddir> && pushd <builddir> ... Have you already tested building for ppc and sparc? I don't have any hardware for that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2269 --- Comment #4 from Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; 2012-04-12 17:51:08 CEST --- (In reply to comment #3) Would this also require the headers to be relocated as well? What's required to do this? I'm assuming it has to do with other projects it links with? The rpmlint on the existing package looks good. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2269 Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|rpmfusion-package-review@rp |hobbes1069(a)gmail.com |mfusion.org | --- Comment #6 from Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; 2012-04-20 21:36:30 CEST --- Ok, about done with my full review. Just so you know since you're using the _isa macro with a "?", testing for it's existence is redundant. +: OK -: must be fixed =: should be fixed (at your discretion) ?: Question or clairification needed N: not applicable MUST: [+] rpmlint output: shown in comment. [+] follows package naming guidelines [+] spec file base name matches package name [+] package meets the packaging guidelines [+] package uses a Fedora approved license: GPLv2+ [+] license field matches the actual license. [+] license file is included in %doc: COPYING [+] spec file is in American English [+] spec file is legible [+] sources match upstream: md5sum matches (f8a49dea28bd33d3e5b12d1694ae8227) [+] package builds on at least one primary arch: Tested EL6 [N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch [+] all build requirements in BuildRequires [N] spec file handles locales properly [+] ldconfig in %post and %postun [+] no bundled copies of system libraries [+] no relocatable packages [+] package owns all directories that it creates [+] no files listed twice in %files [+] proper permissions on files [+] consistent use of macros [+] code or permissible content [N] large documentation in -doc [+] no runtime dependencies in %doc [+] header files in -devel [N] static libraries in -static [N] .so in -devel [N] -devel requires main package [+] package contains no libtool archives [N] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install/validate [+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages [+] all filenames in UTF-8 SHOULD: [+] query upstream for license text [N] description and summary contains available translations [+] package builds in mock [+] package builds on all supported arches: Tested x86_64 [?] package functions as described: Not tested [+] sane scriptlets [+] subpackages require the main package [+] placement of pkgconfig files [+] file dependencies versus package dependencies [N] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts *** APPROVED *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.

https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2269 Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|3 |4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.