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=226210 --- Comment #29 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <oget.fedora@xxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-05 02:00:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #28) > > > * rpmlint on the installed package complains: > > > > $ rpmlint opal > > opal.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libopal.so.3.6.2 > > /lib64/libdl.so.2 > > > > This looks like a pkgconfig issue to me. Could you give a hand? > > I don't see any of that. I just got an error on space vs tab which is now > fixed. > > [perobinson@neo SPECS]$ rpmlint opal.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/opal* > ../SRPMS/opal-3.6.2-2.fc11.src.rpm > 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. > [perobinson@neo SPECS]$ > Yes, but you can also run rpmlint against installed packages, which may show other flaws if there are any. One of these flaws that doesn't show up when you run rpmlint against the actual rpm files is the unused-direct-shlib-dependency warning. Just simply run $ rpmlint opal and you will see > > * %configure --prefix=/usr > > Please use the %{_prefix} macro > > Updated as it seems upstream have finally fixed the build without the need to > specify the prefix :-) > Nice. Btw, %configure should define the prefix for you among other things. You can run $ rpm -E %configure to see what else it defines. > You can see the update here, I'm not going to push a new build for a few minor > changes. They'll go into rawhide when I can push 3.6.3 > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/opal/devel/opal.spec?view=markup All good. I'll go over the package one last time and let you know if there's anything else. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review