[Bug 226079] Merge Review: libxml2
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Apr 13 11:06:37 UTC 2008
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Merge Review: libxml2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226079
bugzilla at redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severity|normal |medium
Priority|normal |medium
Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora
Version|devel |rawhide
------- Additional Comments From bugs.michael at gmx.net 2008-04-13 07:06 EST -------
> Prefix: %{_prefix}
This is wrong. The packages are not really relocatable.
For example, there are hardcoded paths in xml2-config,
the pkgconfig file, the libtool archive, and xml2Conf.sh
> %{prefix}/include/*
> %{prefix}/bin/xml2-config
> %{prefix}/share/aclocal/libxml.m4
It should be %{_bindir}, %{_includedir} and %{_datadir} everywhere.
> Docdir: %{_docdir}
Redundant.
> -rw-r--r-- root root 1546914 /usr/lib/libxml2.a
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/StaticLibraryPolicy
> %post
> /sbin/ldconfig
> %postun
> /sbin/ldconfig
Prefer
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
to execute ldconfig directly and not via /bin/sh
> Patch0: multilib.patch
It is common practise to prefix such files with the name (and
preferably also the version) of the package, e.g.
libxml2-2.6.32-multilib.patch
> make
If make %{_smp_mflags} causes problems, please add a comment.
> %files devel
> %doc AUTHORS ChangeLog.gz NEWS README Copyright TODO
> %files python
> %doc AUTHORS ChangeLog.gz NEWS README Copyright
Is it necessary to duplicate these files? They are already
in the main package, which is a strict requirement for these
two sub-packages.
* rpmlint gives lots of warnings when run on the binary rpms.
Some are valid, e.g. "file-not-utf8"
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list