https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2052939
Petr Menšík pemensik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pemensik@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Petr Menšík pemensik@redhat.com --- Why is this package called libfungw, when upstream repository and page refers to it only as fungw? Does that conflict with existing fedora package? I think fungw is better name for the package.
Why do you have %{name}-perl aliases and then use
%package -n %{libperl} ??
%package perl without -n produces just %{name}-perl by default. It is simpler, cleaner and easier to read. Unless different prefix is required, use just suffixes for subpackages. There are multiple definitions not really required.
Just use:
%package perl Requires: %{name}...
%description perl Blabla
%files perl %{_bindir}/whatever
It the application uses dlopen, I think it should have own subdirectory %{_libdir}/%{name}, where it would store its own shared code/libraries. %_libdir is reserved for libraries used by ld.so.