Request 829840 (accepted)

You're not reviewing the full diff of request 829840 , but the diff to the superseded request 827601 (Show full diff)

Overview

Request 829840 accepted

New package. Removed static libraries. Now using %version

Created by gabrielftg over 4 years ago
In state accepted
Supersedes 827601

Submit pveclib

Comments for request 829840 1
Comments for request 827601 1

Gabriel Gomes (gabrielftg) - over 4 years ago

author source maintainer

On the review for request 827601, dimstar made 3 comments: 1. no static libraries (fixed); 2. use %version (fixed); 3. rename the devel package (not fixed, see explanation below).

I did not rename the devel package (from libpvec-devel to pveclib-devel) because doing so causes the following lintian warning:

"pveclib-devel.ppc64le: W: no-dependency-on pveclib*/pveclib-libs/libpveclib*"

My question to dimstar is:

Your comment was just a suggestion/preference, or is it required? I like the idea of having a devel package that has the same name as the library package, because, in my experience, it makes it easier to zypper search for the devel package. On the other hand, I understand that other libraries have different names for the devel package, e.g. zlib-devel and libz1. So, if I were to change the name of the devel package, should I add a lintian filter for the warning?

Dominique Leuenberger (dimstar) - over 4 years ago

reviewer

Some comments, more or less 'bad':

+%{_libdir}/lib*.a > Please see https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Packaging_guidelines#Static_Libraries (in short: no statics lib packaged) (this one is fatal)
45+Requires: libpvec1 = 1.0.4 => you most likely want = %{version} here. It will almost certainly forgotten to be updatedn on each version bump
I'd rather call the devel package pveclib-devel (pveclib being the upstream name and matching the includedir name)