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=480103 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter <fabian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-01-19 17:40:49 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=329407) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=329407) rpmlint output There are still some issues. - From my point of view, the name should be bnirc.spec https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Case_Sensitivity https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Spec_file_name - One line per BR would be nice - The %file section needs some work - duplicates - ownership - You need to make a devel subpackage - *.la files must be deleted https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries The rpmlint output [fab@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint bnIRC* bnIRC.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/src/debug/bnIRC-1.1.1/plugins/server_strings/server_strings.c .... .... .... bnIRC.i386: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/bnirc.debug bnIRC.i386: E: statically-linked-binary /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/bnirc.debug 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 22 errors, 75 warnings. see attachment for full details -- 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