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=226008 --- Comment #2 from Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> 2010-02-03 03:36:45 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > rpmlint: > > libgcrypt.src: W: strange-permission hobble-libgcrypt 0755 > > libgcrypt.x86_64: W: no-documentation > Include license text at the very minimum - see below; including AUTHORS > ChangeLog NEWS README (?) THANKS TODO wouldn't hurt either. Fixed. (I did not include ChangeLog and README as they are not much useful.) > > libgcrypt.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /lib64/.libgcrypt.so.11.hmac > See recent discussion on fedora-devel Technically this file (in contrary to the .hmac files in bin dirs) does not break the FHS. It is still not completely decided where this file should live in case of libgcrypt as the library is not in %{_libdir} but in /%{_lib} > * libgcrypt-devel contains files under GPLv2+: gcrypt.{texi,info},dumpsexp.c > => use "License: GPLv2+", or perhaps better "License: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+", > or split the package Fixed. > * libgcrypt should contain %doc COPYING.LIB, Fixed. > libgcrypt-devel %doc COPYING Fixed. > * "The BuildRoot value MUST be below %{_tmppath}/ and MUST contain at least > %{name}, %{version} and %{release}:" - %release is not used Fixed. > * Can you avoid %makeinstall? src/Makefile.in seems to support DESTDIR. Fixed. > * Use %global instead of %define Not fixed. This is not a MUST and here the %define works fine and will work fine in future rpm versions as well. > * > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment I've added a comment. Here is a new build with the problems fixed. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1960493 -- 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