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=473835
--- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter <fabian(a)bernewireless.net> 2009-07-26 17:16:05
EDT ---
Thank you guys.
(In reply to comment #4)
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc. NEEDSWORK
-Please add COPYING to the doc section
After the review of Gratien I removed COPYING. But the fixed version came back
with 0.1.2. COPYING added
(In reply to comment #5)
(In reply to comment #4)
> Notes:
> -Your package should BuildRequire: python-devel instead of python
Actually, python-setuptools-devel pulls in python-devel, so that's not a
problem. But it's better to BR it exclusively.
For newer Fedora releases that's true. For releases < F-11 the guidelines told
another story. Changed.
(The ./ in front of setup.py is unnecessary when run via python.)
Removed
I suggest using autoarchive instead of %{name} in the %files section
for
consistency.
Changed
Requires: lzma is not enough IMHO. The package seems to need also
tar, gzip and
bzip2.
Yes, you are right, the 'archiver class' shows points that let indicate that
all this tools are needed.
Here are the updated files:
Spec URL:
http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/autoarchive.spec
SRPM URL:
http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/autoarchive-0.1.2-2.fc11.src.rpm
--
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.