[Bug 204601] Review Request: geda-examples - Circuit examples for gEDA
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Fri Sep 1 14:25:36 UTC 2006
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: geda-examples - Circuit examples for gEDA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204601
------- Additional Comments From mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2006-09-01 10:25 EST -------
This package is very simple and there exists little
problems or questions.
First review of geda-examples :
1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines :
* Requires
* File and Directory Ownership
- Well, this package may be unuseful without geda-gschem,
however, does this package "really require" geda-gschem?
I mean that for example, xorg-x11-docs maybe unuseful without
xorg-x11 installed, however, xorg-x11-docs itself does not
require anything.
If the problem is only for the ownership of
%{_datadir}/gEDA/ (owned by geda-schem), this is a good
reason for geda-symbols to own %{_datadir}/gEDA/, too, and
the requirement for geda-gschem can be removed.
You can see for example that /usr/share/X11/ is owned by
several packages, e.g.
imake, libX11, xorg-x11-xsm, xorg-x11-apps, .....
- Another thing is %{_datadir}/gEDA/examples . This is
also owned by geda-gschem. If you think that this package
(geda-examples) really requires geda-gschem, then the entry
of %dir %{gedaexampledir} can be removed.
Well, the problem of ownership of directories is complicated
when there are several packages which are mutually related.
2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
= Nothing.
3. Other things I have noticed:
= Nothing.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the package-review
mailing list