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=749753 Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |751466 --- Comment #3 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-11-04 16:55:50 EDT --- The BuildRoot tag at the top of the spec file is unnecessary in all current versions of Fedora. Also, the -devel subpackage should be declared "BuildArch: noarch", which also means removing the "%{?_isa}" from that subpackage's Requires of the main package. Note that the rpmlint output below is from the installed packages, not the binary RPMs. Some checks are disabled for the latter. +: OK -: must be fixed =: should be fixed (at your discretion) N: not applicable MUST: [+] rpmlint output: clxclient.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 P_thread::thr_start(int, int, unsigned long) clxclient.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 typeinfo for P_thread clxclient.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 P_thread::~P_thread() clxclient.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 ITC_ip1q::get_event(unsigned int) clxclient.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 P_thread::thr_start(int, int, unsigned long) clxclient.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 P_thread::P_thread() clxclient.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 /usr/lib64/libfreetype.so.6 clxclient.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 /lib64/libm.so.6 clxclient.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libclxclient.so.3.6.1 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 clxclient-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings. This means that libclxclient.so.3.6.1 is NOT linked with -lclthreads but should be (hence the undefined non-weak symbols), and is linked with -lfreetype and -lm, but should not be. This alteration of your sed command nearly fixes the issues: # Force Fedora's flags and fix the link line sed -e 's|-O2|%{optflags}|' \ -e 's|/sbin/ldconfig|# /sbin/ldconfig|' \ -e 's|`freetype-config --libs`||' \ -e 's|-lpthread -lXft -lX11|-lclthreads -lXft -lX11|' \ -i Makefile This doesn't completely fix the problem, though, due to bug 751466. [+] follows package naming guidelines [+] spec file base name matches package name [+] package meets the packaging guidelines [+] package uses a Fedora approved license [-] license field matches the actual license: actual license is LGPLv2+ [+] license file is included in %doc [+] spec file is in American English [+] spec file is legible [+] sources match upstream: md5sum is bd47f80a855d3203fcf10365e79d85e4 for both [+] package builds on at least one primary arch (tried x86_64) [N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch [+] all build requirements in BuildRequires [N] spec file handles locales properly [+] ldconfig in %post and %postun [+] no bundled copies of system libraries [+] no relocatable packages [+] package owns all directories that it creates [+] no files listed twice in %files [+] proper permissions on files [+] consistent use of macros [+] code or permissible content [N] large documentation in -doc [+] no runtime dependencies in %doc [+] header files in -devel [N] static libraries in -static [+] .so in -devel [+] -devel requires main package [+] package contains no libtool archives [N] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install [+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages [+] all filenames in UTF-8 SHOULD: [N] query upstream for license text [N] description and summary contain available translations [+] package builds in mock: tried fedora-rawhide-i386 [+] package builds on all supported arches: tried i386 and x86_64 [+] package functions as described: no simple means of testing [+] sane scriptlets [+] subpackages require the main package [N] placement of pkgconfig files [N] file dependencies versus package dependencies [N] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts -- 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