[Bug 877275] Review Request: lhapdf - Les Houches Accord PDF Interface

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877275

--- Comment #8 from Mattias Ellert <mattias.ellert at fysast.uu.se> ---
(In reply to Björn Esser from comment #7)
> Review revealed:
> 
> BLOCKERS:
> 
>   * pdfsets-minimal && pdfsets-doc
> 
>     ---> Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} \
>          != \
>          Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

Incorrect. Noarch subpackages must never have %{?_isa} dependencies. Noarch
packages must be installable on any architecture.

> NON-BLOCKERS:
> 
>   * el5 legacy-stuff ( RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTION )
>     I'd start using conditionals or expansions for el5-lagacy in spec-files
>     like these examples:

I disagree with you on this point. Conditionals are great where they are needed
in order to make a difference. But if used solely to exclude lines that would
be ignored or have no effect they just add clutter that makes the specfile
harder to read. I would not call RHEL5 legacy since it is an actively
maintained ditribution. RHEL4 is legacy.

The additional lines needed for EPEL5 will be removed when RHEL5 is EOL, just
as additional lines for EPEL4 are being removed when packages are updated now
that RHEL4 is EOL.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=aFf4ZHO3wy&a=cc_unsubscribe