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=675234 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Moschny <thomas.moschny@xxxxxx> 2011-02-23 05:21:08 EST --- Hi Sergio, thanks for your comments! (In reply to comment #1) > duply.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary duply > ***Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. > > Perhaps you contact the author to provide one man page. The author already declined such a request once: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2933556&group_id=217745&atid=1041150 but maybe I can ask him again. > I've found a file with an encoding different from utf-8 > > Notes: > -Encoding: > file -i ./usr/bin/duply > ./usr/bin/duply: text/x-shellscript; charset=iso-8859-1 > > rpmlint does not complain about it, however you may convert it with iconv: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#file-not-utf8 Good catch, fixed. > -Tags: > BuildRoot tag is not needed: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag > > -Sections: > The same goes for %clean section: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean Both are needed as I am intending to also maintain the package also for EPEL5. Updated spec and src rpm: Spec URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/duply/duply.spec SRPM URL: http://thm.fedorapeople.org/duply/duply-1.5.4.2-1.fc13.src.rpm -- 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