[Bug 680205] Review Request: allegro5 - Allegro 5 is a game programming library.

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=680205

--- Comment #4 from Brandon McCaig <bamccaig at gmail.com> 2011-03-04 21:35:09 EST ---
Spec URL: http://castopulence.org/rpm/allegro5/5.0.0-2/allegro5.spec
SRPM URL:
http://castopulence.org/rpm/allegro5/5.0.0-2/allegro5-5.0.0-2.fc13.src.rpm

I've tried to address your initial remarks. I guess it's ready for round two.
Not necessarily there yet, but we'll see. I reorganized the spec (I agree that
it makes a lot more sense this way), split the BuildRequires (it was only so
long because I didn't now how to split it xD), added explicit
%{version}-%{release} dependencies on subpackages, got rid of all library
dependencies (not sure I did this correctly), and fixed up some simple issues
that rpmlint caught. To determine which subpackages I would merge into the core
package(s) I did the following with the built RPMs:

for f in $HOME/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/*; do
    rpm -pq --requires $f > `basename $f`.requires;
done
for f in allegro5-addon-*.requires; do
    diff -u allegro5-5.0.0-1.fc13.i386.rpm.requires $f | less;
done

I then examined the differences and only merged the packages that showed
external differences. The only exception to that rule was leaving
addon-physfs*, even though I didn't notice any differences, per your advice. I
suspect that maybe I'm missing some explicit dependencies there (unless the
main package somehow needs it too). We'll see... ^^

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.