https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=852416 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher@xxxxxxxxx> --- Good: - rpmlint checks return: pangox-compat.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/pango/pangox.aliases A configuration file is stored in your package without the noreplace flag. A way to resolve this is to put the following in your SPEC file: %config(noreplace) /etc/your_config_file_here pangox-compat.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/pangox-compat-0.0.1/COPYING The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. pangox-compat-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. All ignorable given it's a compat package. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( LGPLv2+ ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream with sha512 - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - 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 - devel package ok - no .la files - post/postun ldconfig ok - devel requires base package n-v-r Really clean, good. Working on mock build to confirm BRs. Will approve if that's good. -- 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