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=723197 --- Comment #1 from David Tardon <dtardon@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-07-19 07:20:42 EDT --- rpmlint run, with inline comments: rpmlint SPECS/ooo2gd.spec SRPMS/ooo2gd-3.0.0-1.fc16.src.rpm RPMS/x86_64/ooo2gd-3.0.0-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm SPECS/ooo2gd.spec: W: invalid-url Source1: nbproject.tar.bz2 SPECS/ooo2gd.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: ooo2gd-3.0.0.tar.bz2 ooo2gd.src: W: invalid-url Source1: nbproject.tar.bz2 ooo2gd.src: W: invalid-url Source0: ooo2gd-3.0.0.tar.bz2 Upstream does not do source releases. And it does not include nbproject directory in the repository. ooo2gd.x86_64: E: no-binary ooo2gd.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib LibreOffice places all bundled extensions into one directory, therefore this package must be arch-specific even if it is technically noarch. IMHO it should not be very hard to extend LibreOffice to allow multiple directories for one type of "deployment context" (bundled, shared, user), but that is for the future. ooo2gd.x86_64: W: no-documentation So what? ooo2gd.x86_64: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/lib64/libreoffice/share/extensions/ooo2gd/GDocs.jar That is the idea. It does not work otherwise. 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings. -- 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