https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2330615
--- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok <[email protected]> --- Comparing the package with tcl fist. I am not entirely sure this needs an epoch set, but there is no harm in having it. Perhaps also drop this, and let it be obsoleted by the tcl 9 package? Obsoletes: tcl-tcldict <= %{vers} You might want to be more specific in %files, not to accidentally conflict. E.g. instead of %{_bindir}/tclsh* use %{_bindir}/tclsh8* The rest of the differences make sense. ============================================================ About the spec as-is: - Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: tcl8-devel. Does not provide -static: tcl8-devel. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries tcl8-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/libtclstub8.6.a tcl8-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/lib64/libtclstub8.6.a I suggest dropping this entirely. --------- No need to number the Sources and Patches. --------- No need for %ldconfig_scriptlets. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2330615 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202330615%23c2 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
