Spec URL: <http://villadalmine.fedorapeople.org/edfbrowser.spec> SRPM URL: <http://villadalmine.fedorapeople.org/edfbrowser-1.52-1.fc19.src.rpm> Description: EDFbrowser is a multi-platform viewer for EEG, EMG, and ECG storage files. Fedora Account System Username: villadalmine
I want to know why your changelog said: * Wed Sep 11 2013 Rino Rondan <villadalmine> - 1.52-1 fedoraproject.com????????
Changed to villadalmine
Okay okay ;) 1. I saw your %description is appended without a blank line after the last BR, it's better to leave a blank line for readability. 2. Ah... In %prep: cp -p images/edf.png images/edfbrowser.png then in %install install -pm 0644 images/%{name}.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/ I don't understand, why can't you just install -pm 0644 images/edf.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/%{name}.png? 3. I can see %doc doc I prefer %doc doc/* as users will enter /usr/share/doc/$(NAME) and then see all docs immediately but not /usr/share/doc/$(NAME)/doc.
Hi: my changes.. 1- ok , done. 2- The source directory ./images have different png so i want only one to use in order to use it with edfbrowser.desktop that is on sources to apply with desktop configuration, so i choose to use the same that the package name. actual --> install -pm 0644 images/%{name}.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/ proposed --> install -pm 0644 images/edf.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/%{name}.png Let me know if it is ok . 3- I use /* in order to prevent the creation of extra doc directory after the name of package and plus i added LICENSE file. Regards
People get sponsored, packages aren't.
This package have bundle libraries , im working in order to get those package as a package too. http://sourceforge.net/projects/kissfft/ http://uazu.net/fidlib/ Regards
(In reply to Rino Rondan from comment #6) > This package have bundle libraries , im working in order to get those > package as a package too. > http://sourceforge.net/projects/kissfft/ > http://uazu.net/fidlib/ > > Regards Feel free to submit them as review requests if they are not in the repo, I will review.
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the submitter to proceed with the review. If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take this ticket. Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.
This review request is very old. Do you still intend to complete it? If so, I can review. If not, please close the issue.
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.