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=675050 Kaleb KEITHLEY <kkeithle@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Version|rawhide |16 Resolution|RAWHIDE | AssignedTo|david@xxxxxxx |kkeithle@xxxxxxxxxx Flag|fedora-review+, fedora-cvs+ |fedora-review? Keywords| |Reopened --- Comment #27 from Kaleb KEITHLEY <kkeithle@xxxxxxxxxx> 2011-08-08 10:07:04 EDT --- Re-review after package name change from CloudFS to HekaFS rpmlint SPECS/hekafs.spec SRPMS/hekafs-0.7-7.fc15.src.rpm RPMS/x86_64/hekafs-0.7-7.fc15.x86_64.rpm hekafs.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US hekafs.src: W: invalid-license AGPLv3+ hekafs.x86_64: W: invalid-license AGPLv3+ hekafs.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided cloudfs hekafs.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.2.1/xlator/features/libmaprbtree.so hekafs.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/hekafs hekafs.x86_64: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/init.d/hekafsd $prog 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. cloudfs never shipped, so nothing ever provided cloudfs and the Obsoletes is only for for possible truth-and-beauty and the few early adopters and as such I'm not sure I see the value of having a 'Provides: cloudfs' Successful koji scratch builds of x86_64 and i686. -- 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