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=732218 --- Comment #3 from Thomas Spura <[email protected]> 2011-09-23 14:56:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > Thanks for the review! > > 1. Yes, of course, I will change the specification file name to > travelccm.spec. > As a matter of fact, locally, to test the build of the package, I usually do a > symbolic link on the latest version of the specification file (e.g., > travelccm.spec -> travelccm.spec-0.5.0-1.spec). That avoids confusion around > the version of the specification file. Yes, it will only always cause a rpmlint warning, when you link to the versioned spec. Maybe rsyncing with "-L" would help here. > 3. For the doc sub-package, I guess that you meant: > %if ! (0%{?rhel} < 6) > BuildArch: noarch > %endif > It makes sense to me, and I will alter the specification file. Yes, of course :( > > 4. About the LGPLv2+ headers, you mean that I should add them into the source > code? Hmm, I ought to remember, that's a SHOULD to ask upstream for doing so, e.g.: http://ball-trac.bioinf.uni-sb.de/ticket/220 -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
