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: scanbuttond - Scanner Button tools to SANE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209082 jima@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |jima@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From jima@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-10-03 13:52 EST ------- Taking ownership of this bug, blocking FE-REVIEW. Not doing a review yet; let's fix a couple bugs first. First set of errors: chmod those files to 644 before generating your SRPM. They don't need to be executable before the build process puts them into %{buildroot}. That's what rpmlint is complaining about. The second set of errors stems from the fact that you installed the initscript as /etc/rc.d/init.d/scannerbuttond/scannerbuttond, not /etc/rc.d/init.d/scannerbuttond -- you created the directory %{buildroot}%{_initrddir}/scannerbuttond when you should have created %{buildroot}%{_initrddir} . Easy fix. That allows rpmlint to run successfully on the main package, albeit with output: E: scanbuttond incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/scannerbuttond scanbuttond E: scanbuttond incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/scannerbuttond scanbuttond E: scanbuttond incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/scannerbuttond scanbuttond W: scanbuttond incoherent-init-script-name scannerbuttond The first three have to do with a mismatch between your initscript's name (scannerbuttond) and the lock file in /var/lock/subsys/ (scanbuttond). The last one has to do with a similar mismatch between the package name and the initscript. Is there a particular reason you'd like the initscript to be named scannerbuttond when every other reference says scanbuttond? If so, fix the initscript to use the right lockfile name (and I guess the warning isn't a blocker). If not, change the initscript name and all the errors go away. I hacked together a fixed spec, which you can peruse here: http://beer.tclug.org/fedora-extras/misc/scanbuttond.spec In addition to using that spec, I chmod'd Source1-3 644 and renamed scannerbuttond to scanbuttond.init for clarity. On another (minor) stylistic note, I suspect, judging by the nature in which they get installed, that Source2 & Source3 could possibly be formed as a patch instead. Yep. Shaves a couple lines off your spec, and a measly ~500 bytes off. No huge deal. I won't consider your method to be a blocker, by any means. I'll do a more thorough review once you remedy the actual problems. -- 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