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: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208250
------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2006-09-29 06:57 EST ------- Okay. Full review for piklab.
1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines
* Use rpmlint W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink \ /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common - Well, this warning itself is no problem, however, the problem is that this symlink is broken. Perhaps this should point to ../common .
2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : = Nothing.
3. Other things I have noticed: - Well,
/etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
These two files are same. Acutally spec file says: %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \ %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \ %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
I suspect only one of these two are necessary. Also, while this is not documented, the files under /etc/security/console.perms.d/ seem to have the names like <number>-<specific name>.perms (like 50-default.perms).