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


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832





--- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp>  2009-01-30 
12:29:18 EDT ---
Well,

> I need only to replace this 2 command's by install instead using cp.
> 
> mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/locale
> cp -a ./$database%{_datadir}/locale %{buildroot}%{_datadir}

If "cp" can be used here, you can just use cp.
I frequenty use both "install" and "cp" in one spec file.

By the way for .22-1:

* Working directory
----------------------------------------------------------
#install doc about alternatives
install -Dp -m 644 %{SOURCE1} %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{base_version}
----------------------------------------------------------
  - Well, even in %prep after %setup -q is finished, the working directory
    is %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{base_version} for this case.

* Autotool recall
  - build.log says:
----------------------------------------------------------
   649  + make -j4
   650  cd . && /bin/sh /builddir/build/BUILD/mydns-1.2.8/missing --run
autoheader
   651  /builddir/build/BUILD/mydns-1.2.8/missing: line 46: autoheader: command
not found
   652  WARNING: `autoheader' is missing on your system.  You should only need
it if
   653           you modified `acconfig.h' or `configure.ac'.  You might want
   654           to install the `Autoconf' and `GNU m4' packages.  Grab them
   655           from any GNU archive site.
   656  rm -f stamp-h1
   657  touch config.h.in
   658  cd . && /bin/sh ./config.status config.h
   659  config.status: creating config.h
   660  config.status: config.h is unchanged
   661  make  all-recursive
----------------------------------------------------------
    Still autotools are called. Please suppress this.

* cflags
  I didn't notice this before, however:
----------------------------------------------------------
   613  checking CFLAGS... -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
-fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386
-mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fomit-frame-pointer
-finline-functions -ffast-math -funsigned-char
----------------------------------------------------------
  - -fomit-frame-pointer is not allowed on Fedora because this makes
    debugging very difficult
  - Also -ffast-math should be avoid unless you have some reasons
    because this changes (decreases) the precision of math functions and 
    introduces some assumption.

* Scriptlets
  - As I said in my previous comment, please add proper Requires(post) or
    so.
(In reply to comment #11)
> * scriptlets
>   - For SysV initscripts handling, please refer to
>     
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript#InitscriptScriptlets
>     (Note that there are some Requires(post) or so)
> 
>   - Add "Requires(post): %{_sbindir}/alternatives" (also Requires(preun))
>     for -mysql and -pgsql subpackages 

    By the way:
-----------------------------------------------------------
if [ $1 = 1 ]; then
   /sbin/chkconfig --add %{name}
fi
-----------------------------------------------------------
    - if [ $1 = 1 ] is not needed. If service name is already registered
      in initscript symlinks, then chkconfig --add does nothing.
      Also, removing [ $1 = 1 ] can handle the case in which
      service name changes correctly.

* Info file
  - I checked the info file and actually mydns.info.gz is empty
    (try gunzip).
    I guess some BuildRequires are missing (perhaps texinfo)

* Directory ownership issue
  - %_datadir/%name is not owned by any packages.

* Gettext .mo files
  - Making gettext .mo files owned by two subpackages is not needed.
    Please these files to pydns package.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

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

Reply via email to