[Bug 212894] Review Request: libopm - Blitzed open proxy monitor library
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Nov 2 17:26:16 UTC 2006
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: libopm - Blitzed open proxy monitor library
Alias: libopm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212894
------- Additional Comments From chris.stone at gmail.com 2006-11-02 12:26 EST -------
-For the RPM_OPT_FLAGS, I did not check the actual flags being used. I simply
noted it because I did not see it explicitly mentioned in the spec file. I will
take a closer look at this issue when I do the formal review. You can leave it
out for now if you think it's not needed.
- I suggested you use %defattr(-,root,root,-) because all of the examples given
use this. It probably doesn't matter much and I wont block the review because
of it, but I don't see any harm in adding it either.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines?highlight=%28defattr%29
- The group doesn't matter to me, I can't find anything anywhere defining the
groups so you can leave it as is if you like.
- I suggested you use --disable-static because of this:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-2302ec1e1f44202c9cc4bcce24cb711266557ad7
Which states that static libraries should be disable whenever possible. So
unless you got a *really* good reason to keep the static library, then I will
allow you to keep it in the package, but you must add a comment in the spec file
explaining the *really* good reason for you to keep it. Otherwise this is a
blocker and the static library must be removed before I can approve it.
- For the version number, I suggested 0.0.0 because this was the version number
use in the .so filename. However, if you want to use 0.1, that is fine too. :)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/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