Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906473 Jos de Kloe <josdekloe@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |josdekloe@xxxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |josdekloe@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Jos de Kloe <josdekloe@xxxxxxxxx> --- there seems to be a tiny difference between your spec file and the spec file in the your srpm: diff erlang-ranch.spec.srpm_version erlang.ranch.spec.dowloaded_from_review_request 18c18 < # Error:erlang(lists:keyfind/3 in R12B and earlier --- > # Error:erlang(lists:keyfind/3) in R12B and earlier I trust you'll fix the srpm version in the next update. mock runs fine and creates 2 rpm files. The rpmlint results on these rpm files are: $ rpmlint erlang-ranch-0.6.1-1.fc19.src.rpm erlang-ranch.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) acceptor -> accept or, accept-or, accept erlang-ranch.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US acceptor -> accept or, accept-or, accept erlang-ranch.src: W: invalid-url Source0: extend-ranch-0.6.1-0-gd635aec.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint erlang-ranch-0.6.1-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm erlang-ranch.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) acceptor -> accept or, accept-or, accept erlang-ranch.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US acceptor -> accept or, accept-or, accept erlang-ranch.x86_64: E: no-binary erlang-ranch.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib erlang-ranch.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/erlang-ranch-0.6.1/doc/overview.edoc 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. The spelling-error and invalid-url warnings are not significant I think. The no-binary error seems more significant. According to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#no-binary E: foo-package no-binary The package should be of the noarch architecture because it doesn't contain any binaries. Solution:- Add BuildArchitectures: noarch to the SPEC file Since erlang beam files should be cross-platform compatible, this seems to be applicable to me. If this is not the case for this package, please explain why. Also the file-not-utf8 warning seems correct to me. A fix is documented here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#file-not-utf8 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=NC0xaurm8L&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review