https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143919
Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #11 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> ---
Thanks, looks good to me now Sorry for the delay, the previous notification
email seems to have been lost in my inbox somewhere :(
I have three minor non-blocking complaints (included below), and one blocking
complaint.
===
Two minor complaints that you can fix before importing the package:
%{_prefix}/lib/dracut/modules.d/71prefixdevname
%{_prefix}/lib/dracut/modules.d/71prefixdevname/*
%{_prefix}/lib/dracut/modules.d/71prefixdevname-tools
%{_prefix}/lib/dracut/modules.d/71prefixdevname-tools/*
These cause RPM to match the directories themselves twice.
If you want to have the packages to own these two directories *and* all their
contents, then you can just use:
%{_prefix}/lib/dracut/modules.d/71prefixdevname/
%{_prefix}/lib/dracut/modules.d/71prefixdevname-tools/
Which is more concise and does not cause RPM to complain.
The Patch0001 file looks ok to me, but it would be great to document *why* this
is necessary, or if this patch is a candidate for upstreaming (or if it's even
a backport of an upstream change).
Additionally, you might want to use "rust-packaging >= 23" instead of
">= 21",
since the %cargo_license macro was only added in v23.
===
I also ran a scratch build of the latest version:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=101875804
The build failed due to the tests failing on i686. This might indicate an issue
that's specific to 32-bit architectures.
I assume you do not need prefixdevname on i686 since it's not a multilib
capable package at all, so I would be fine if you just added "ExcludeArch:
%{ix86}".
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2143919
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...