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=519282 José Matos <jamatos@xxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #24 from José Matos <jamatos@xxxxxxxx> 2009-10-28 14:25:10 EDT --- Good: - rpmlint checks returns calibre.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/calibre/fonts/prs500/tt0419m_.ttf /usr/share/fonts/liberation/LiberationMono-Regular.ttf calibre.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/calibre/calibre/plugins/pictureflow.so 0775 calibre.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/calibre/calibre/plugins/podofo.so 0775 calibre.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/calibre/calibre/plugins/pdfreflow.so 0775 calibre.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/calibre/calibre/plugins/fontconfig.so 0775 calibre.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/calibre/calibre/plugins/lzx.so 0775 calibre.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/calibre/fonts/prs500/tt0003m_.ttf /usr/share/fonts/liberation/LiberationSans-Regular.ttf calibre.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/calibre/calibre/plugins/cPalmdoc.so 0775 calibre.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/calibre/fonts/prs500/tt0011m_.ttf /usr/share/fonts/liberation/LiberationSerif-Regular.ttf calibre.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/calibre/calibre/plugins/msdes.so 0775 The dangling links are commented in the spec and there is nothing else to add. :-) The problem with the non-standard-executable-perm is the following: $ rpm -qp --provides calibre-0.6.19-3.fc12.x86_64.rpm cPalmdoc.so()(64bit) config(calibre) = 0.6.19-3.fc12 fontconfig.so()(64bit) lzx.so()(64bit) mimehandler(application/epub+zip) mimehandler(application/x-sony-bbeb) msdes.so()(64bit) pdfreflow.so()(64bit) pictureflow.so()(64bit) podofo.so()(64bit) calibre = 0.6.19-3.fc12 calibre(x86-64) = 0.6.19-3.fc12 Not that all the so's that show up above also appear below, that is the problem. This should be fixed. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPLv3) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in American English - source matches upstream after the removal of the problematic parts as explained in the spec file. sha256sum 5f6366327de00adbf2b8bb2e1c4008b8d2620a8a85089aa4930a2a22511a3778 - package compiles and builds on devel (x86_64) - locales are correctly handled - owns all directories that it creates - .desktop files are correctly set - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - not relocatable - no duplicate files - permissions ok (other than the above problem) - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime With the non-standard-executable-perm issue fixed this package is APPROVED. There is no need to post the correction here I trust that you will do it on import. Meanwhile as discussed above I will sponsor you. Well done, nice job with this "enfant terrible". :-) -- 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