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=487312 --- Comment #1 from Thomas Woerner <twoerner@xxxxxxxxxx> 2009-02-25 13:14:58 EDT --- $ rpmlint tuned-0.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. OK $ rpmlint tuned-0.1.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm tuned.noarch: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/tuned $prog 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. OK $ rpmlint tuned-utils-0.1.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm tuned-utils.noarch: W: no-documentation tuned-utils.noarch: E: devel-dependency kernel-debuginfo 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. Hm, I wonder why there is a devel-dependency for kernel-debuginfo. I see that the scripts are systemtap scripts. Therefore this should be OK. Packaging guidelines: Can you please fix the URL for the git tree to be consistent and maybe add a description how to get the proper version from git? Please also fix the url in the wiki page. (See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL) Can you please use "%(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX)" for Buildroot? (See: BuildRoot tag at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines) Please fix whitespaces in the GPL headers (example: tuned). Why is tuningplugins/__init__.py empty? Why is there a reference to configure in INSTALL. There is no configure script at all. -- 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