Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ibmasm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193059 ------- Additional Comments From konradr@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-09-05 14:04 EST ------- (In reply to comment #23) > Builds cleanly, rpmlint complains on the -devel package Oh, I completly forgot to run rpmlint on the -devel package. Thank you for spotting that. > > W: summary-ended-with-dot > E: summary-too-long > W: no-docs (not worried by) > E: script-without-shellbank %{_includedir}/ibmasm/rsa.h and libibmasm.h > > The errors need fixing (the last one is probably just a case of setting the > permission to 644 for each file) Done. > > Not building in mock > > Executing /usr/sbin/mock-helper chroot > /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/root /sbin/runuser - root -c > "/sbin/runuser -c 'rpmbuild -ba --target i386 --nodeps > /builddir/build/SPECS/ibmasm.spec' mockbuild" > error: File /builddir/build/SOURCES/ibmasm_user_3.0-9.fc6.tar.bz2: No such file > or directory > > (this could well be my system, but it's working on other packages correctly) This is due to: Release: 9%{?dist} and Source0: ibmasm_user_%{version}-%{release}.tar.bz Should I just remove the %{?dist} out? I decided to do that for the .10 release. It can always be changed back, or there can be two types of Release: tags? Here is the 3.0-10 release with fixes. SPEC URL:http://ibmasm.cvs.sourceforge.net/*checkout*/ibmasm/ibmasm/ibmasm.spec SRPMS URL: http://osdn.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/ibmasm/ibmasm-3.0-10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review