https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174290 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> --- As usual, I'd suggest adding %global _docdir_fmt %{name}, to avoid having a separate doc and license dir for each subpackage. (Although you'd probably have to take some extra steps so that the html documentation does not end up in the packages, so it might not be worth the effort.) Is the comment about the license of the spec file really necessary? By default all spec files in Fedora are MIT licensed [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main?rd=Licensing#License_of_Fedora_SPEC_Files], so there's little difference with the BSD license that is currently specified, and having an explicit (and different) license requires extra thought from whomever would e.g. want to copy part of the spec file to incorporate into a different spec file. - license is OK - license file is present and %license is used - build flags and parallel build are used - spec file is nice and clean - name is OK - filesystem layout is OK - latest version is packaged - %check is present - installs and runs without problem Rpmlint ------- Checking: scalasca-openmpi-2.2.2-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm scalasca-mpich-2.2.2-2.fc23.x86_64.rpm scalasca-doc-2.2.2-2.fc23.noarch.rpm scalasca-2.2.2-2.fc23.src.rpm scalasca-openmpi.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Toolset -> Tool set, Tool-set, Togolese scalasca-openmpi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime -> run time, run-time, rudiment scalasca-openmpi.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/openmpi/lib/libpearl.base.so.0.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 scalasca-openmpi.x86_64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/openmpi/lib/libpearl.base.so.0.0.0 ... This is not in ld path anyway, so can be ignored. scalasca-mpich.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libpearl.thread.omp.so.0.0.0 vtable for pearl::MemoryError ... OK. scalasca-mpich.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libpearl.thread.omp.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6 scalasca-mpich.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libpearl.ipc.mockup.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libstdc++.so.6 scalasca-mpich.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libpearl.ipc.mockup.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6 scalasca-mpich.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libpearl.ipc.mockup.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 OK too. Those libraries are always installed anyway, so even if they could be removed from the dependency list, nothing would be gained. Requires -------- scalasca-mpich (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcube4w.so.7()(64bit) libcubewriter4.so.7()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1()(64bit) libgomp.so.1(GOMP_1.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1(GOMP_4.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1(OMP_1.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1(OMP_2.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libmpi.so.12()(64bit) libmpicxx.so.12()(64bit) libotf2.so.5()(64bit) libpearl.base.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mockup.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.replay.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.omp.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.ser.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.hyb.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) mpich(x86-64) rtld(GNU_HASH) scalasca-openmpi (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcube4w.so.7()(64bit) libcubewriter4.so.7()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1()(64bit) libgomp.so.1(GOMP_1.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1(GOMP_4.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1(OMP_1.0)(64bit) libgomp.so.1(OMP_2.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libmpi.so.1()(64bit) libmpi_cxx.so.1()(64bit) libotf2.so.5()(64bit) libpearl.base.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mockup.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.replay.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.omp.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.ser.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.hyb.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) openmpi(x86-64) rtld(GNU_HASH) scalasca-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- scalasca-mpich: libpearl.base.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mockup.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.replay.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.omp.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.ser.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.hyb.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.mpi.so.0()(64bit) scalasca-mpich scalasca-mpich(x86-64) scalasca-openmpi: libpearl.base.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mockup.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.ipc.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.mpi.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.replay.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.omp.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.thread.ser.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.hyb.so.0()(64bit) libpearl.writer.mpi.so.0()(64bit) scalasca-openmpi scalasca-openmpi(x86-64) scalasca-doc: scalasca-doc Requires and Provides are sane, but will be much imporoved when https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1241282 goes through. You should probably then rebuild this package. Everything seems fine. Package is APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review