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=501228 --- Comment #4 from KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-22 00:49:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > The rpmlint says as follows: > > [kaigai@masu ~]$ rpmlint > /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/i586/mod_selinux-2.2.1903-1.fc11.i586.rpm > mod_selinux.i586: E: explicit-lib-dependency libselinux > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. > > The mod_selinux requires libselinux but I didn't note an explicit earliest > version number because it is now unclear when getcon_raw()/setcon_raw() is > included into libselinux package. > (At least, it was already merged in the period of Fedora *Core*.) > > Is it allowed to restrict it on somewhere enough new version > (e.g libselinux >= 2.0.0)? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Explicit_Requires Hmm, it says as follows: | Packages must not contain explicit Requires on libraries except | when absolutely necessary. When explicit library Requires are necessary, | there should be a spec file comment justifying it. I fixed the mod_selinux.spec to remove explicit dependency to libselinux (without specific version number), as follows: Spec: http://sepgsql.googlecode.com/files/mod_selinux.spec_v2.2.1930 SRPM: http://sepgsql.googlecode.com/files/mod_selinux-2.2.1930-1.fc11.src.rpm Thanks, -- 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