[Bug 433225] Review Request: dvipdfmx - A DVI to PDF translator

[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: dvipdfmx - A DVI to PDF translator


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433225





------- Additional Comments From jonathan.underwood at gmail.com  2008-02-17 18:09 EST -------
(In reply to comment #5)
> rpmlint says:
> 
> dvipdfmx.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 9)
> dvipdfmx.i386: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/dvipdfmx-20071115/NEWS
> 

OK, will fix.


> It seems to me that version should be 0 and release should be
> 0.x.20071115. However, dvipdfmx in texlive is already at release 16, so
> it seems to me that it can be 
> 17.x.20071115. Or even x.20071115 with x beginning at 17.
> 

Well, here I'd agree we should have something like x.20071115 as the version
number, but I don't like the 17 - what happens when upstream get to 1.0 for
example. This seems like a legitimate use of epoch to me. What do you think?

> Why the texlive-texmf BuildRequires?
> 

For the macro definitions eg. _texmf_main etc.

> The files
> %{_texmf_main}/fonts/cmap/EUC-UCS2
> %{_texmf_main}/fonts/cmap/UniKSCms-UCS2-H
> %{_texmf_main}/fonts/cmap/UniKSCms-UCS2-V
> are already owned by texlive-texmf-fonts, which package should own them?
> 

I think these should be in the dvipdfmx package, as they originate from that
tarball - will wait for Jindrich to comment on this also.

> In the texlive spec, there is, for the dvipdfmx subpackage:
> # for cmap files
> Requires: texlive-texmf-fonts = %{texlive_ver}
> 

Yes, I can do that in this package also.

> I think that it would be better to list explicitly the files
> in %_bindir, to avoid surprises.
> 

OK.

> I suggest adding INSTALL='install -p' to make install.

OK. Can't help wondering why this isn't a guideline.

-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.