Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection 
Kit


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-04-29 17:25 EST -------
Alright, I'm working on a full review. rpmlint output:

rpmlint jack-audio-connection-kit-0.101.1-4.fc5.i386.rpm
W: jack-audio-connection-kit no-version-in-last-changelog

Remember to tag your changelog entries with the package version number, like so:

* Thu Apr 27 2006 Andy Shevchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.101.1-4

W: jack-audio-connection-kit one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig
W: jack-audio-connection-kit one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig

I don't know why mock is complaining. You've got exactly whats in
ScriptletSnippets. Ignore it?

rpmlint jack-audio-connection-kit-devel-0.101.1-4.fc5.i386.rpm
W: jack-audio-connection-kit-devel no-version-in-last-changelog

Ditto.

rpmlint jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients-0.101.1-4.fc5.i386.rpm
W: jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients no-version-in-last-changelog

Ditto.

W: jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients no-documentation

Ignorable.

Also, I notice the man page for jackstart is getting installed even though the
binary isn't. Looks like that's ultimately an upstream bug.

And I see a %{__make} macro in there, as far as I know its useless, and its also
inconsistent with the rest of the spec. Just use plain make.

My preference would be to not use %{name} in source lines. And maybe not even in
the subpackage Requires:. It should be unlikely that the package name would ever
change.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

Reply via email to