[Bug 464781] Review Request: flexdock - Java docking UI element. First package.

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464781





--- Comment #29 from D Haley <mycae at yahoo.com>  2009-01-22 06:09:42 EDT ---
SPEC URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/flexdock-9.spec
SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/flexdock-0.5.1-9.fc10.src.rpm 

Scratch:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1073687

$ rpmlint flexdock.spec  ../RPMS/i386/flexdock-0.5.1-9.fc10.i386.rpm
../SRPMS/flexdock-0.5.1-9.fc10.src.rpm 
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

>There's still trailing whitespace in the following lines
I re-ran the whitespace removal  through vim. What is so bad about trailing
whitespace anyway - provided it isn't multi-kilobyte?

>mkdir -p %{buildroot}/usr/share
Gone.

>Why don't you just modify the patch?
Because of lib64 vs lib.

>-d2u

It forces dos to unix conversion mode. I now just use sed instead, its neater
and is one less require.

>Couldn't you just patch the build system not to put arch in lib filename?

The way they do this, from memory is a bit odd. Patching would require more
work than simply locating the SOFILE -- locating the SOFILE is easier and the
project is not changing that much, and the SOFILE name wont change a lot, so it
is maintainable. Either way the end result is the same -- we locate the SOFILE.
Using find is marginally slower, but I am not writing my spec files for speed.

>strip --strip-unneeded $SOFILE

Calling strip is not allowed because you need the debugging symbols, however
calling strip-unneeded does not intefere with the debugging symbols. However to
make it neater I have changed this (see next item)

> Actually it's simple. Just don't chmod the .so to 644. It has to be executable
> for rpmbuild debuginfo scripts to find it. rpmlint is silent afterwards.

Done.

>Manually making symlinks is fragile, especially for versioned JARs.

Versioned jars were not being symlinked, although named ones were. The version
number is to satisfy the flexdock buildsys. I have switched it to using
build-jar-repository, but I feel that the new method is less straightforward,
and more likely to break. I personally think the new method is more obscure.

>These are not needed, as the library is not in ld.so search path (and not
directly linkable).

Dropped post/postun

>I suggest using a case statement here. It'll be easy to add other arches later.
>For example sparc64.

Done. 

> Changelog entries must have a space between * and date.
Done.

>Why do you need a specific libX11 version?
Gone. I cant seem to track down any reason for this.

-- 
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.