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: elektra - A key/value pair database to store software configurations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209906 ------- Additional Comments From pertusus@xxxxxxx 2006-10-15 06:41 EST ------- I don't think the potential conflicts are a sufficient reason to do things differently than upstream, reporting is enough in my opinion. I don't think that it is up to the packager to check the warnings, reporting is enough, especially when the warnings may be innocuous. I have split out the static libraries in another sub-package in the new version: http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/elektra.spec http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/elektra-0.6.4-2.src.rpm The rpmlint warning and errors seems acceptable to me, the last 3 are linked with -static not being recognized by rpmlint: W: elektra conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/profile.d/elektraenv.sh W: elektra symlink-should-be-relative /usr/lib/elektra/libelektratools.so /usr/lib/libelektratools.so.1 E: elektra-static devel-dependency elektra-devel W: elektra-static no-documentation W: elektra-static devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libelektra.a -- 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