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=470727 Lucian Langa <cooly@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |cooly@xxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Lucian Langa <cooly@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-06 13:25:59 EDT --- a few comments: - there is a newer upstream 2.6.1b, and it seems upstream switched to a more sane naming. - "a" and "b" tags from version seems to me like post release package, so please see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#NonNumericRelease - there is a doc target for building development documentation (requires doxgey and pdfjam) - rpmlint is not silent: slimdata.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/libslim.so you need to set the exec bit on the so file slimdata.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libslim.so library does not have soname set, as this is a system library this is a blocker. you will have to recompile the file with -Wl,-soname -Wl,libslim.so. You should also report this upstream. slimdata.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libslim.so exit@xxxxxxxxxxx slimdata.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libslim.so exit@@GLIBC_2.2.5 This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork() context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the situation. these are not blockers but they should be reported upstream slimdata-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation see my previous comment about documentation. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review