https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1987298

Ben Beasley <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |needinfo?(code@musicinmybra
                   |                            |in.net)



--- Comment #5 from Ben Beasley <[email protected]> ---
> - There is no architecture-specific modification of these header files, right?
>   They're just installed exactly as they are in the souce tarball, I believe.
>   In that case, shouldn't the *-devel packages all be noarch?

This is logical, but the packaging guidelines mandate and justify otherwise:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_do_not_use_noarch

> - The stb_image_write-devel and stb_sprintf-devel descriptions each contain a
>   percent sign, which should be doubled to tell RPM they aren't macros.

Thanks. I will fix this.

> - Some of the compiler warnings indicate real problems.  […]

Thank you for the detailed analysis of particular issues. I will comb through
the compiler warnings and offer patches upstream as needed.


-- 
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]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

Reply via email to