https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1341642 Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Ralf Senderek from comment #10) > I think I have addressed all your comments. I think you have. Thanks for the quick turnaround. = Review = Good: - rpmlint checks return: cryptlib.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US crypto -> crypt, crypts, crypt o cryptlib.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US crypto -> crypt, crypts, crypt o cryptlib.x86_64: E: missing-call-to-setgroups-before-setuid /usr/lib64/libcl.so.3.4.3 cryptlib-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib cryptlib-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation cryptlib-test.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/cryptlib/stestlib cryptlib-test.x86_64: W: no-documentation cryptlib-test.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/cryptlib/c/cryptlib-test.c cryptlib-test.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/cryptlib/test/filename.h cryptlib-test.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/cryptlib/test/test.h cryptlib-java.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib cryptlib-java.x86_64: W: no-documentation cryptlib-python2.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cryptlib_py.so cryptlib-python2.x86_64: W: no-documentation cryptlib-perl.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/perl5/auto/PerlCryptLib/PerlCryptLib.so 8 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 14 warnings. All safe to ignore (though, you might want to take that setuid/setgroups issue to the upstream). - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (Sleepycat) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (df5fbae81bdda9e1f89afe7fb347332102327e48dca5dc0cbdf86d3c899d01a0) - 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 - 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 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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx