[Bug 221372] Review Request: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: rb_libtorrent - A C++ BitTorrent library aiming to be the best alternative
Alias: rb_libtorrent

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=221372





------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net  2007-01-17 11:43 EST -------
Re-check "License:" as it is _not_ GPL.

> ## Uses the same naming schema for libraries/directories :( 
> Conflicts:	libtorrent

IMO this conflict is unacceptable. Actually, "libtorrent" is
libtorrent.so.9, this one is libtorrent.so.0, and "libtorrent-devel"
uses /usr/include/torrent/ while this one uses /usr/include/libtorrent/.
So, theoretically they could even co-exist at this point of time,
provided that they got some love from upstream. But so far, the
rename is half-hearted.

> %files
> %{_bindir}/client_test
> %{_bindir}/simple_client

For a library package and the limited /usr/bin namespace, these two
file names are far too generic. They ought to be moved or renamed.

The filenames /usr/bin/dump_torrent and /usr/bin/make_torrent are
quite generic, too. Upstream is highly encouraged to choose an own
namespace.

> %files devel
> %doc COPYING docs/*

The file COPYING is included in the main package already.

> %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/libtorrent.pc

This file is tuned for static linking, unfortunately, in that
it links libraries which libtorrent.so.0 is linked against
already.

> Requires: openssl-devel

Where do you see this requirement?


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.