Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894338
--- Comment #11 from Ramon de C Valle <rcvalle(a)redhat.com> ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Or maybe you're contradicting yourself or not being clear
enough.
Not at all. Eric will be able to explain it to you, because it is his review
you misunderstood to begin with.
> "...it doesn't happen for the "silently" updated Spec file
anymore
I've downloaded _two_ src.rpms from this ticket, and the second one still
was suffering from the same problem. If you continue to publish updates
silently in an attempt to fix issues reported to you, you need to accept
that reviewers still refer to older files:
Maybe this is because I'm working
with Eric to resolve the issues reported?
Until now you haven't annouced yourself as a reviewer nor as a possible
sponsor, so don't expect notifications or anything made specially for you.
$ md5sum libdistorm-3.3-1.fc18.src.rpm
beac57444a21349c4a65c76f0e81cebc libdistorm-3.3-1.fc18.src.rpm
Build Date: Mon 14 Jan 2013 05:26:20 PM CET
That's why it's common practice to update the Release tag *and* to maintain
a %changelog section in the spec file.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:FrequentlyMadeMistakes I wouldn't
change it or add a changelog entry until the package is ready for
the initial release.
> Why is it better than:
>
> rm -fr %{_builddir}/distorm3
> unzip %{SOURCE0}
> %setup -q -n distorm3/make/linux -D -T
Nobody claimed anything would be "better". I only pointed out that your
%prep section didn't work well and suggested a cleaner working one. Your
latest one still isn't pretty, and the top builddir is still not related to
%name-%version, but if it works and if you like it so much, nobody would
object. ;-)
What's the status of the package here now?
If you are going to review it, the
latest version was just "silently" uploaded.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5lpJDWbKuk&a=cc_unsubscribe