Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: flac https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225757 ------- Additional Comments From bnocera@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-02-14 07:01 EST ------- (In reply to comment #4) > The formal review is here: <snip> > MUST FIX: > > BAD rpmlint is NOT silent. > > result of running "rpmlint -vi" > W: flac-devel summary-ended-with-dot Static libraries and header files from FLAC. > you forgot the dot in the second Summary ;-) Fixed. > I: flac.i386.rpm checking > E: flac obsolete-not-provided flac-libs > The obsoleted package must also be provided to allow clean upgrade paths > and not to break dependencies. Added a Provides. > I: flac.srpm checking > W: flac unversioned-explicit-obsoletes flac-libs > The specfile contains an unversioned Obsoletes: token, which will match all > older, equal and newer versions of the obsoleted thing. This may cause update > problems, restrict future package/provides naming, and may match something it > was originally not inteded to match -- make the Obsoletes versioned if > possible. I'm afraid I don't have a version for the obsoletes. I think flac-libs was being used by 3rd party repositories before the package was included in RH. Should all get fixed in the 1.1.4 package (as soon as i resolve patch conflicts) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review