Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 ------- Additional Comments From fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2007-07-17 15:43 EST ------- (In reply to comment #55) > [root@dhcp006 SPECS]# rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/SRPMS/hylafax-5.1.6-1.src.rpm > E: hylafax configure-without-libdir-spec > > HylaFAX's configure is not a direct derivative from the autoconf versions, and > thus there is no --libdir= option for HylaFAX's configure. Correct, ignore the warning. > [root@dhcp006 SPECS]# rpmlint > /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/x86_64/hylafax-5.1.6-1.x86_64.rpm | sort > E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.daily/hylafax > E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/cron.hourly/hylafax > E: hylafax executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/hylafax Safe to ignore as I already said in comment #12 > E: hylafax non-readable /var/spool/hylafax/etc/hosts.hfaxd 0600 Ignore, see comment #12 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/archive 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/docq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/doneq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/pollq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/sendq 0700 > E: hylafax non-standard-dir-perm /var/spool/hylafax/tmp 0700 Ignore > E: hylafax script-without-shebang /usr/sbin/faxsetup.linux > > This file, faxsetup.linux, is a shell script stub. It is included (via ".") > from the invoked faxsetup script. Ok, ignore. > W: hylafax non-conffile-in-etc /etc/hylafax/faxcover_example_sgi.ps > > While it is true that the example coversheet is not itself a configuration file, > it is meant to be configured - i.e. replaced, and it belongs there. Ok. > [root@dhcp006 SPECS]# rpmlint hylafax | sort > W: hylafax unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libfaxserver.so.5.1.6 > /lib64/libm.so.6 > W: hylafax unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libfaxutil.so.5.1.6 > /lib64/libm.so.6 > > These two are particularly curious to me, and I cannot figure them out. ldd -r -u /usr/lib64/libfaxserver.so.5.0.4 -- snipped _lots_ of undefined symbols -- Unused direct dependencies: /usr/lib64/libjpeg.so.62 /lib64/libz.so.1 /lib64/libcrypt.so.1 /lib64/libutil.so.1 /lib64/libm.so.6 I haven't looked at this deeper yet, it is not necessarily a blocker, see http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2006-June/msg00176.html Could you please take a look at the undefined symbols again? As there are no major blockers you can submit a new srpm for review. Hope we aren't getting any SELinux troubles. What Fedora Version are you running with hylafax? Do you have SELinux enabled? -- 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