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: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207782 ------- Additional Comments From mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-10-08 12:30 EST ------- Well, from my viewpoint: 1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines : * rpmlint - rpmlint is not silent. E: itpp-debuginfo script-without-shebang /usr/src/debug/itpp-3.10.5/itpp/base/itpp_version.h - This is because the permission of this file is incorrect. W: itpp-devel no-documentation - I think this can be ignored. W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZTVN10__cxxabiv117__class_type_infoE W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZTISt13basic_fstreamIcSt11char_traitsIcEE W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZNSt13basic_fstreamIcSt11char_traitsIcEED1Ev W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZNSt13basic_fstreamIcSt11char_traitsIcEED0Ev W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZThn8_NSt13basic_fstreamIcSt11char_traitsIcEED1Ev W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZThn8_NSt13basic_fstreamIcSt11char_traitsIcEED0Ev W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZTv0_n12_NSt13basic_fstreamIcSt11char_traitsIcEED1Ev W: itpp undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 _ZTv0_n12_NSt13basic_fstreamIcSt11char_traitsIcEED0Ev ..... (continued) - Linkage is incorrect. You can check this by: $ ldd -r /usr/lib/libitpp.so.2.2.0 Some people say that this is not a blocker, while other perple say this is a blocker. My opinion is, since this is a library and is thought to be used by other package, this warning IS a blocker for this package. * Requires: - Check the Requires for -devel packages (see the section Requires of http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines: For -devel package, dependency for the package should be checked manually). * BuildRequies: - redundant BuildRequires is found. * perl (included in mimimal buildroot) * tetex, tetex-dvips <- required by tetex-latex * Timestamps - cp AUTHORS ChangeLog NEWS README TODO \ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} * Use "cp -p" 2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines : * MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)... - Include "COPYTING" in main package. This is a MUST item. -- 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