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: sunifdef https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193480 ------- Additional Comments From rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-06-01 03:03 EST ------- # rpmlint sunifdef-* E: sunifdef description-line-too-long Sunifdef is most useful to developers of constantly evolving products with large E: sunifdef-debuginfo script-without-shellbang /usr/src/debug/sunifdef/src/ptr_vector.c E: sunifdef-debuginfo wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/sunifdef/src/ptr_vector.c E: sunifdef-debuginfo script-without-shellbang /usr/src/debug/sunifdef/src/ptr_vector.h E: sunifdef-debuginfo wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/sunifdef/src/ptr_vector.h E: sunifdef-debuginfo script-without-shellbang /usr/src/debug/sunifdef/src/state_utils.c E: sunifdef-debuginfo wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/src/debug/sunifdef/src/state_utils.c => Shorten your description => Wrong permissions on source files. Running find \( -name '*.c' -o -name '*.h' \) -exec chmod -x {} \; inside of %prep fixes this. Further issues: * The "source-tarball" ships an autom4te.cache, i.e. it is rather carelessly packaged. I recommend to remove this autom4te.cache in %prep, in advance to running configure. I.e. you might consider to rm -rf autom4te.cache in %prep * The "source-tarball" ships a precompiled sunifdef linux binary. I recommend to remove it in %prep, i.e. consider to add rm -rf build-bin to %prep * The sources contain a test suite. I recommend to add a %check section to the spec to run it: %check make check * Many of the warnings are "punned pointer" warnings. These should not be taken lightly. They are an indication that a package contains bad code that can causem "random" problems caused by side-effects of compiler optimization. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review