https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2112
--- Comment #3 from Richard <[email protected]> 2012-01-19 22:58:25 CET --- (In reply to comment #2) > It seems to me, the license is LGPLv2. The license text is cut in a weird way: > > // This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or > // modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public > // License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either > // version 2.1 of the License. Yeah, I used "licensecheck" which didn't pick up the v2. Fixed. > I think you'll have to BR cmake. Yeah, the strange part is not having it didn't keep a mock build from working. cmake must be in the standard build environment now. Fixed. > Just some cosmetic issues: > > - You could popd in the end Eh :) Since it resets the dir between sections I usually don't bother :) > - You could put the doxygen BR next to the other BRs, because BRs are not > specific for sub-packages Yeah, sometimes it's can be useful to a packager to know if a BR is needed for a specific sub-package, but -doc is pretty obvious. Fixed. > - You could add "-b somedescription~" to your %patch calls I added one for the second patch. I've already gotten a verbal confirmation that the first will be upstreamed. As long as one of them has a -b they won't clobber each other, right? > - f2c alrealy requires f2c-libs, so you could omit the latter Fixed. > - You could ask upstream to work on the hundreds of compilation warnings I'm not sure how active it is. I'm only packaging this as a requirement for FreeCAD which so far seems to "work" as is. But I'll at least let upstream know about the warnings. Richard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. You are the assignee for the bug.
