Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208250
------- Additional Comments From aportal@univ-montp2.fr 2006-09-29 07:20 EST ------- (In reply to comment #19)
Okay. Full review for piklab.
- Use rpmlint
W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink \ /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common
- Well, this warning itself is no problem, however, the problem is that this symlink is broken. Perhaps this should point to ../common .
No. KDE recently changed /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/common in /usr/share/doc/HTML/$LANG/docs/common.
See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-September/msg00794.h... and some follow up.
From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : = Nothing.
Other things I have noticed:
- Well,
/etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms /etc/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
These two files are same. Acutally spec file says:
%{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \ %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit1.perms %{__install} -pm 644 %{SOURCE3} \ %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/security/console.perms.d/pickit2.perms
I suspect only one of these two are necessary.
No, this is an error, the second should be %{SOURCE4}
Also, while this is not documented, the files under /etc/security/console.perms.d/ seem to have the names like <number>-<specific name>.perms (like 50-default.perms).
I don't know how to choose a number. This configuration is taken from http://piklab.sourceforge.net/support.php section "for distributions using udev and PAM.