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=502189 Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-05-22 12:14:52 EDT --- OK - package built with mock (tested on F-10 x86_64 & F-11 x86). OK - rpmlint libglpng on installed library is quiet. OK - library has a SONAME: 0x000000000000000e (SONAME) Library soname: [libglpng.so.1] Warning(OK) - Unused direct dependencies : # ldd -d -u /usr/lib64/libglpng.so.1.45 Unused direct dependencies: /usr/lib64/libpng12.so.0 /usr/lib64/libGL.so.1 This is weird since thoses are exactly the one that would be suggested to be usefull. One more reason not to trust too much unused direct dependencies. But at least, I don't understand why the Author speak about zlib ? It doesn't seems used from this library: quoting from glpng.htm: "It is implemented using modified versions of the LibPNG 1.0.2 and ZLib 1.1.3 libraries." Warning(OK) - directory owned by multiple package: /usr/include/GL: Since this libglpng-devel doesn't depend on another package that would own this directory, this is fine to own it. OK - source from package and website match: $ sha1sum libglpng_1.45.orig.tar.gz 98d9298c2a8588d4731af1ce22cfbf79ea5349cd libglpng_1.45.orig.tar.gz Warning(OK) - package doesn't bundle a License file, but header is explicit (MIT) Usability test: Tested with chromium (built time/ runtime) OK - (funny). This package is APPROVED -- 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