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=464014 Jerry James <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(loganje...@gmail. | |com) | --- Comment #11 from Jerry James <[email protected]> 2009-03-06 17:41:20 EDT --- I moved the description of the -tools subpackage into README.fedora, which is a %doc file for that subpackage and made the %description more succinct. New versions are here: Spec URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs/findbugs.spec SRPM URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/findbugs/findbugs-1.3.7-4.fc10.src.rpm As for the Class-Path in the MANIFEST.MF, I understand the advice to avoid that field. It can cause problems. However, its use in this case is mandatory. There are other projects which "consume" findbugs, in the sense that they invoke its jar to gain access to its functionality. When a jar is invoked with "java -jar X.jar", then the CLASSPATH environment variable is ignored; Java uses only the Class-Path field in the manifest. So that field had better be nonempty and absolutely correct. In general, "invokable" jars (those with a Main-Class entry in the manifest) should be exempt from the "no Class-Path" rule. Java 7 can't come soon enough. :-) It's modular deployment facilities should render all this brain damage moot. In the meantime, please let the Class-Path entry stay. I need it for other software I wish to push into Fedora in the future. -- 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 [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
