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=704112 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla <limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2011-10-17 23:37:29 EDT --- SPEC and SRPM differ. Based on SRPM: This builds. :) Good: - rpmlint checks return: recutils.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) recfile -> refile, rec file, rec-file The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. recutils.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recfiles -> refiles, rec files, rec-files The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. Ignore. recutils.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.gnu.org/software/recutils/ <urlopen error timed out> The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. Valid, but was slow in my browser tonight. recutils-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. recutils-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Runtime -> Run time, Run-time, Rudiment The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. Ignore. recutils-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/librec.so.0.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork() context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the situation. recutils-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/librec.so.0.0.0 _exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork() context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the situation. Can these be corrected? If so, is it upstreamable? recutils-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. Not much to include here. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( GPLv3+ ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file Moc build to test BRs in progress. -- 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