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=510734 --- Comment #69 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) <pa...@hubbitus.info> 2009-09-25 16:00:35 EDT --- Sorry for delay guys. (In reply to comment #67) > I've looked at the newest package (and especially at the new > subpackage) and unfortunately there are some new issues: > > TODO: > The directory %{_datadir}/%{name} is not owned by the javaviewers > subpackage. > Using %{_datadir}/%{name}/ instead of %{_datadir}/%{name}/classes should > fix it. Ups, sorry. Fixed. > TODO: > The subpackage should require the fully-versioned main package: > Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} Why? I think in this case, when its built in separate source release of main package have no matter. > TODO: > Regarding the BR for the build of the java parts please follow these > guidelines: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#BuildRequires_and_Requires > > It may be debatable whether the "Requires:" are need, but since > the java clients may also be executed outside of the browser, it would > be OK to use them. I add only BuildRequires: java-devel >= 1:1.6.0 BuildRequires: jpackage-utils but you are right, Java applets intended even on remote machine execution, so, it do not Require in current. > TODO: > There are some minor wording/spelling mistakes in the description > of the javaviewers sub-package. I suggest the following: > > Summary: VNC clients (java applets) VNC clients (browser java applets) ok? > > Description: > The package contains the corresponding java clients for %{name}. They > can be used with any java-enabled browser and provide an easy access to > the server without the need to install software on the client machine. Ok. > TODO: > Man pages should not be marked as %doc. (sorry, I've overseen this in > the first review) Ok, thanks. > TODO: > Please use consistently: %defattr(-,root,root,-) Ok. > TODO: > In general the java packaging guidelines encourage the packagers > to build the GCJ AOT bits: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines > I've had a quick look and it looks like that it is possible to activate it. Is it really required? What advantage for that in nowadays? Only add mesh into spec legibility... > TODO: > Please add the files mentioned by Orcan in #66 to the subpackage as well. Off course. > MINOR: > please replace "ln -s" by %%{__ln_s} Ok. Additionally I change License: GPLv2+ for javaviewers subpackage as Spot say in post #68. http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora11/x11vnc/x11vnc-0.9.8-12.fc11.src.rpm http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora11/x11vnc/x11vnc.spec -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
