https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215807
--- Comment #3 from Bastien Nocera <[email protected]> --- > Issues: > ======= > - ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. > Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in umockdev > See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shared_Libraries Done. > - RPath should be removed from the binary > See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath Done. > - License field is LGPLv3+, but the license headers and COPYING seem to be > LGPLv2+ Done. > - License text must use %license, not %doc > See: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text First time I hear of it. Done. > Optional: > ========= > - Fully versioned requires (from the -devel to the main package) are > recommended That's already done, no? > - The Python dependency is only required (according to configure.ac) for > extra tests during "make check", but there is no %check section in the > package. I would either drop the dependency or enable make check Done. > - Preserve timestamps during install with INSTALL="install -p" Done. > - Use pkgconfig for BuildRequires > See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PkgConfigBuildRequires Probably should have when I started it, but I'm not sure that's necessary now. I'll bear it in mind for future packages. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9595251 Spec: https://hadess.fedorapeople.org/umockdev/umockdev.spec SRPM: https://hadess.fedorapeople.org/umockdev/umockdev-0.8.8-2.fc22.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
