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=670302 --- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-01-18 22:03:48 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) > unistd.h added (not sure why I'm not getting those warnings) I was building the package in f14 and f15-x86_64 mock-chroots on f14-x86_64 => package received RPM_OPTS_FLAGS. Likely you are building in an ordinary user's environment (The files inside of your srpm being owned by user mjg59 indicates this) without explict explicitly setting CFLAGS etc. [NB: This is one of the situations AM_SILENT_RULES exposes its harmfulness: You don't know which cflags you are using, which directories are being passed to gcc etc.] Further comments/findings: 1. Still one moderately serious warning: libbacklight.c:81:2: warning: implicit declaration of function 'strtol' 2. libbacklight.h lacks a "header inclusion guard", i.e. something similar to this: #ifndef LIBBACKLIGHT_H #define LIBBACKLIGHT_H <actual contents> #endif 3. Still no legal information in libbacklight.h (no copyright/license). 4. libbacklight.h includes <pciaccess.h> I don't see libbacklight.h uses any external symbol which could originate from <pciaccess.h> => makes me think this could be a bug. However, should this #include be intentional, then libbacklight-devel would need "Requires: libpciaccess-devel" + this dependency be reflected to libbacklight.pc Finally, a general remark: Please increment a package's rpm-revision each time you replace it in reviews - It tremendously helps reviewers. TIA. -- 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