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=738057 --- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter <rdieter@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2011-09-23 12:30:34 EDT --- $ rpmlint semantik semantik.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/libnablah.so semantik.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libnablah.so /usr/lib64/libQtCore.so.4 semantik.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libnablah.so /usr/lib64/libQtGui.so.4 semantik.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libnablah.so /usr/lib64/libQtWebKit.so.4 semantik.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libnablah.so /usr/lib64/libQtNetwork.so.4 semantik.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libnablah.so /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 semantik.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libnablah.so /lib64/libm.so.6 semantik.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libnablah.so /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 semantik.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary semantik 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Mostly harmless here. libnablah.so in particular seems to be a convenience library, so no soname isn't much of an issue. naming: OK sources: OK $ md5sum *.bz2 0eb6f38b56390815e33e11505eb85ee2 semantik-0.7.3.tar.bz2 licensing: OK scriptlets: OK macros: OK no issues. APPROVED. What's your FAS username? Given that, I'll get the sponsor-ball rolling. lastly, I'd urge you to contact upstream developers about the patches used here, the desktop file and ocaml compatibility in particular. -- 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