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=188542 Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW AssignedTo|tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx |nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #101 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-10-14 15:51:04 EDT --- As far as I can tell, that's not even the same hylafax. Which underpins the reason why this package will never be approved (by me, at least) without being renamed to hylafax+ as has been repeatly requested in this ticket. Since comment #83 indicates that this won't happen, I don't even know why I still have this ticket assigned to myself. So I'm just unassigning myself and returning this to the review queue. As I do that, I'll make a few notes: The package in comment #99 still builds OK in today's rawhide and rpmlint really doesn't complain about much. In fact, I'll just post it here: hylafax.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.hourly/hylafax hylafax.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.daily/hylafax hylafax.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libfaxserver.so.5.2.9 HYLAFAX_VERSION_STRING hylafax.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libfaxserver.so.5.2.9 /lib64/libm.so.6 hylafax.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libfaxutil.so.5.2.9 /lib64/libm.so.6 The first two and last two are not problematic; I'm not really sure about the third one. It was indicated that this should be easy to fix, but I can't suggest how to fix it. The Conflicts: with mgetty-sendfax is problematic according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Conflicts. I'd say that the best way out is to use alternatives as recommended by those guidelines, which requires coordination with the owner of the mgetty package (jskala@xxxxxxxxxx) who should probably be added as a CC if this starts moving forward again. -- 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