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 #33 from Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> 2010-01-25 16:29:50 EST --- (In reply to comment #31) > rpmlints are usually blockers. If not, the packager should explain/defend why > each rpmlint can be disregarded. In this case, the fix should be > straightforward. This is the only outstanding issue on the bug. I've tried the fedora recommended fixes for the unused-direct-shlib-dependency but it breaks the build due to the esoteric build system of opal. Upstream have no interested in fixing them either. I personally don't see that it should be blocking the approval of this and I can't see any other blockers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review