Approval needed again: SCIM

[Jens Petersen]

Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> On 5/16/05, Ryo Dairiki <ryo-dairiki at mbm.nifty.com> wrote:
> I've reviewed the specfile, and there are several improvement
> suggestions I have. See
> http://phy.duke.edu/~icon/misc/fedora-extras/scim.spec.patch for the
> patch. Notably:

Thanks. :)

> 1. PreReq is not required, as everything listed there is assumed to
> exist on the core system.

Actually I think update-gtk-immodules needs to be included though.  And at least 
for Core, requires (prereq) for alternatives is needed - it doesn't seem to do 
any harm to keep it.

> 2. gtk2-devel will pull in everything else via dependencies.

desktop-file-utils should be added however I think.

> 4. rm ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/%{_libdir}/scim-1.0/*/*/*.{a,la} wasn't
> finding all the .a files, so I replaced it with a more general find
> statement.

Is it official FE policy to exclude all static libraries, and .la files too?
Can't libtool make use of the .la files when linking shared libs?

(I'm actually planning to propose for FC5 to move (all) static
libs to -static subpackages in order to make -devel packages lighter.)

> 5. ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}/ : no {} required

Personally I find with {} easier to read, but agree one should fix on one or
the other.

 > 6. I've tried to make the specfile conform to the 80-character width
 > limit for readability, wherever possible.

I think that is a matter of taste - surely 80 columns is only necessary for
changelog entries?  Personally I generally find unbroken lines in spec files
much easier to read.

Thanks for your help, Jens
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: scim.spec-changes2.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1781 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20050517/5f8844b8/attachment.bin>