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=811601 --- Comment #3 from Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-04-23 06:18:12 EDT --- General comment: I think you should add a comment about how Fedora itself is the upstream for this package. Also I think man pages would improve this package. - rpmlint output Some notable issues raised by rpmlint: openstack-utils.src: W: strange-permission openstack-config 0775L openstack-utils.src: W: strange-permission openstack-status 0775L openstack-utils.src: W: strange-permission openstack-demo-install 0775L openstack-utils.src: W: strange-permission openstack-db 0775L openstack-utils.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/openstack-utils-2012.1/LICENSE openstack-utils.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary openstack-demo-install openstack-utils.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary openstack-config openstack-utils.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary openstack-status openstack-utils.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary openstack-db I'm not sure what this one means: openstack-utils.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/openstack-config + package name satisfies the packaging naming guidelines + specfile name matches the package base name + package should satisfy packaging guidelines + license meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora + license matches the actual package license + %doc includes license file + spec file written in American English + spec file is legible n/a upstream sources match sources in the srpm + package successfully builds on at least one architecture n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed n/a BuildRequires list all build dependencies n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/* n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and %postun + does not use Prefix: /usr n/a package owns all directories it creates + no duplicate files in %files + consistent use of macros + package must contain code or permissible content n/a large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage + files marked %doc should not affect package n/a header files should be in -devel n/a static libraries should be in -static n/a packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig' n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base n/a packages should not contain libtool .la files n/a packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file n/a packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages + filenames must be valid UTF-8 n/a use %global instead of %define Optional: n/a if there is no license file, packager should query upstream n/a translations of description and summary for non-English languages, if available n/a reviewer should build the package in mock n/a the package should build into binary RPMs on all supported architectures n/a review should test the package functions as described n/a scriptlets should be sane n/a pkgconfig files should go in -devel n/a shouldn't have file dependencies outside /etc /bin /sbin /usr/bin or /usr/sbin -- 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