https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1107800
--- Comment #3 from Dave Love <d.l...@liverpool.ac.uk> --- (In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #2) > The spec in the url is different from the src.rpm. Please sync up. Sorry, I'd forgotten to update this after I got fedorapeople space. I've put new versions at https://loveshack.fedorapeople.org/review/dl_poly-1.9.20140324-2.el6.src.rpm https://loveshack.fedorapeople.org/review/dl_poly.spec > Take a look at the java guidelines, you're missing some stuff there > (requries jpackage-utils, I studied them, but I thought that got added automatically; clearly it doesn't, at least in RH6. I've added it. > - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size > (~1MB) > or number of files. > Note: Documentation size is 3143680 bytes in 7 files. > See: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation I thought the pdfs were a lot smaller than that -- I wonder why. Anyway, I added a doc package (common to the gui and other packages). > - drop %defattr() > > - Are you targeting EL5? Yes. (That's what most of our users are still running it on.) > If not, you can also drop %clean and the rm -rf > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %install > > - I would consistently use the %{} form of macros for file paths. I've changed them, but it's more painful to type, and doesn't seem to be required by any guidelines I can see. Do you need to do the same with shell variables? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
