https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1545919
Jason Tibbitts <ti...@math.uh.edu> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts <ti...@math.uh.edu> ---
There's basically nothing in this package, so not much to review here. And
nothing really wrong with the package.
The URL might confuse some, but this mirrors what other *-srpm-macros packages
do (and some of those still reference old pkgs.fp.org cgit URLs).
You can just use %_rpmmacrodir instead of %_rpmconfigdir/macros.d if you like.
There's also %rpmmacrodir (which exists in EPEL, tool) but those were added
before RPM grew its own macro.
You don't need %build at all, but I guess if you omit it then rpmlint will
complain (needlessly).
I haven't done an in-depth evaluation of the whole set of typelib-related
changes you're proposing, but I have taken a look at the macros and they seem
pretty much OK to me. The only concern I have is that "%typelib" is rather
generic, and doesn't give any indication that it creates a whole package. It
seems to me that "%typelib_package" would be a bit more descriptive. But
really, that's just bikeshedding, and there is much more that needs to happen
before these macros are actually available and usable (including
redhat-rpm-config updates, acceptance of the related stuff into
gobject-introspection, and related packaging guidelines).
APPROVED
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
