[Bug 503256] Review Request: gtkmm-utils - C++ utility and widget library based on glibmm and gtkmm
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat May 30 18:06:19 UTC 2009
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=503256
--- Comment #8 from Jussi Lehtola <jussilehtola at fedoraproject.org> 2009-05-30 14:06:19 EDT ---
Okay, now it looks a world better.
Still:
- Fix the summary, should be the same one I put as the title of this review
request (library for use with paperbox is not a good summary since gtkmm-utils
can be used for other things too).
- The package should only
BuildRequires: gtkmm24-devel glibmm24-devel
as the rest of the packages you have listed will be automatically pulled in.
(actually gtkmm24-devel pulls in also glibmm24-devel, so basically you need
only BR: gtkmm24-devel)
- Use %{version} in the Source0 line, this will make updating to new versions
easier.
- Drop
--prefix=%{_prefix} --libdir=%{_libdir}
from %configure, since %configure already defines those automatically (you can
see it with
$ rpm --eval %configure
).
- As before,
if [ -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT ]; then rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT; fi
should be just
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
- Devel package needs to
Requires: pkgconfig
for dir ownership.
- Devel package should own the directories
%{_includedir}/glibmm-utils-1.0/
%{_includedir}/gtkmm-utils-1.0/
(you don't have to list the files as this will own everything in those
directories).
- Don't use %attr lines in %files sections; if you have to change the
attributes then do so in %install with chmod. Then you can just include
%{_libdir}/*.so.*
in %files.
- As the devel package requires the main package, there's no need to duplicate
the documentation. Drop the %doc line from -devel. (Yes, this creates an
rpmlint warning but that can be omitted.)
--
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.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list