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: Aqualung - media player with native jack support ans ladspa support https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=430366 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-27 09:56 EST ------- Some pre-review comments - due to the issues with the spec file noted below, I haven't tried to build this package *) The version should be the complete upstream version (that is 0.9beta9), Release should be purely the version of the downstream packaging. *) Your Source path should include the full URL from which the upstream source can be downloaded, not just a filename (see the Tags section of the Packaging Guidelines [1], and the linked document which gives examples for the sourceforge.net case) *) From the source code, your license should be GPLv2+, rather than GPLv2 (the source code specifically states 'or any later version) - see the Licensing Guidlines[2] for more details *) You don't need to list gcc-c++ in your BuildRequires section - see the Packaging Guidelines for full details of packages which don't need to be listed in BuildRequires *) I don't think you need as comprehensive a Requires section. RPM's built in dependency generator generally does a pretty good job - you should only need to list in Requires the packages that you do depend upon that RPM doesn't notice itself. *) The rm command which cleans the buildroot should be in the %install section (not immediately before it) *) You shouldn't use %makeinstall (see the packaging guidelines). Do you really need to do a make install, followed by %makeinstall anyway? *) IMO, it would be neater if the .desktop file was distributed as an additional Source, rather than embedded within the spec file *) You should be consistent with your macro use - either use %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT - don't chop and change throughout the file. *) If you're using desktop-file-install, you must include desktop-file-utils in your BuildRequires *) The <vendor_id> in your call to desktop_file_install should be replaced with the name of the vendor (in this case, I would imagine this is fedora, as upstream aren't providing the .desktop file) And finally: *) The package doesn't build under Fedora 9, because of the dependency on libmad ERROR: Bad build req: No Package Found for libmad-devel. Exiting. See the Forbidden Items list [3] for details of why Fedora can't ship packages which provide MP3 support. [1] - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines [2] - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing [3] - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ForbiddenItems Hope that's of some use ... Simon. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list [email protected] http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
