Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851180
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Sailer t.sailer@alumni.ethz.ch --- Thanks, Greg, for your review!
(In reply to comment #2)
I'm further curious, if there is a version 2+ out, why are you packaging this version, which is running on 3 years old now? Why is mingw-lcms2 not sufficient?
Both versions are not fully API compatible. See for example http://littlecms2.blogspot.ch/search?updated-max=2010-02-15T17:31:00Z&ma...
This is presumably why we have both versions as native libraries as well.
I was packaging poppler for mingw, and poppler still wants lcms v1.
(In reply to comment #3)
-rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review. mingw32-lcms-debuginfo.noarch: E: debuginfo-without-sources mingw64-lcms-debuginfo.noarch: E: debuginfo-without-sources
In my opinion these should be waved. mingw debuginfo packages never include the source code (see for example mingw32-libtiff-debuginfo-3.9.5-7.fc17.noarch.rpm); also, the way this package generates the debuginfo subpackage is exactly as per the fesco approved mingw packaging guidelines https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MinGW?rd=Packaging/MinGW#Manpages_a...
mingw32-lcms-static.noarch: W: no-documentation mingw64-lcms-static.noarch: W: no-documentation
Again, these should IMO be waved, as the mingw packaging guidelines requires documentation which is just a duplicate of the documentation of the native package not to be packaged. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:MinGW?rd=Packaging/MinGW#Manpages_a...
Additional notes:
- Remove the 'rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}' as that is no longer necessary.
done
- Remove the %clean section as that is no longer necessary.
done
- The %defattr lines can be removed as well, they're now unnecessary.
done
- Lines beginning with 'Group:' are superfluous and can be removed
I can do this if you really absolutely require this, but I find it ugly when rpm -qi reports "Group: Unspecified"; also, other mingw packages also provide a group name
- The 'BuildRoot:' line should be removed
done
- Is there a reason you are relying on mingw*-filesystem >= 68 instead of a
newer version?
removed; I think this is a cut&paste artifact
- The two lines that define the globals mingw_build_win{32,64} can be
safely deleted.
done
-
Red Hat Bugzilla