Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=830388
--- Comment #4 from Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com --- (In reply to comment #3)
So it looks like just a few things:
- Add "MinGW build.." to the summaries
Fixed.
- Determine whether the secondary packages need a %doc line
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licen...
- Fix the upstream source URL.
Fixed.
Lines that begin with 'Group:' are superflous, as Fedora makes no use of them. They can be deleted from your spec file.
Removed.
There are also a few other files that might be potential %doc files that you're not including. For instance, you expressly convert NEWS from Latin1 to UTF-8, but then you don't include it in the %doc line. Why is that? README is also a potential for inclusion, I would suppose.
Copy-pasta from the native spec. I've removed NEWS, but added README. We don't include most documentation that can be found in the native package.
This is my first official review as a packager, so bear with me. Kalev is my mentor, so we can inquire of him regarding anything uncertain.
Thanks.
http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-libarchive.spec http://michael.cronenworth.com/RPMS/mingw-libarchive-3.0.4-2.fc17.src.rpm
-
Red Hat Bugzilla