Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: erlang-rebar - Erlang Build Tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639263 Summary: Review Request: erlang-rebar - Erlang Build Tools Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ReportedBy: lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx QAContact: extras-qa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx CC: notting@xxxxxxxxxx, fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-rebar.spec SRPM URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-rebar-2-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Erlang Build Tools. This is one of the requirements for etorrent. rpmlint output: Sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS: rpmlint ../RPMS/ppc/erlang-rebar-2-1.fc12.ppc.rpm erlang-rebar.ppc: E: explicit-lib-dependency erlang-stdlib erlang-rebar.ppc: E: no-binary erlang-rebar.ppc: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib erlang-rebar.ppc: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/erlang/lib/rebar-2/priv/templates/basicnif.c erlang-rebar.ppc: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/erlang/lib/rebar-2/priv/templates/simplenode.erl.script 0644 /bin/bash erlang-rebar.ppc: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rebar 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 3 warnings. Sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS: First message is a false positive - due to "lib" substring in the name of explicit requires. The next two (no-binary, only-non-binary-in-usr-lib) should be ignored too - this is due to the fact that this package is arch-independent but it is installed into arch-dependent library. Next two messages also should be ignored - these are templates, required for package's normal operation. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2505758 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review