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: dbus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225676 mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? ------- Additional Comments From mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx 2007-11-14 22:42 EST ------- Ok, taking this one. rpmlint output: [mclasen@localhost devel]$ rpmlint i386/dbus-1.1.2-8.fc8.i386.rpm dbus.i386: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/messagebus Should probably be fixed to follow the packaging guidelines. dbus.i386: E: non-standard-gid /lib/dbus-1/dbus-daemon-launch-helper dbus dbus.i386: E: setuid-binary /lib/dbus-1/dbus-daemon-launch-helper root 04750 dbus.i386: E: non-standard-executable-perm /lib/dbus-1/dbus-daemon-launch-helper 04750 dbus.i386: E: non-standard-executable-perm /lib/dbus-1/dbus-daemon-launch-helper 04750 This has all been carefully reviewed when dbus system bus activation was implemented, so is ok. dbus.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/dbus-1.1.2/COPYING dbus.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/dbus-1.1.2/ChangeLog dbus.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/dbus-1.1.2/NEWS Should be fixed. dbus.i386: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/dbus-1/session.conf dbus.i386: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/dbus-1/system.conf I think these should probably be %config(noreplace) dbus.i386: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/messagebus Shouldn't be %config dbus.i386: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/messagebus dbus.i386: W: service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/messagebus This is of course not a bug, but necessary. dbus.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name messagebus Not sure what this is about, spurious warning. [mclasen@localhost devel]$ rpmlint i386/dbus-x11-1.1.2-8.fc8.i386.rpm dbus-x11.i386: E: explicit-lib-dependency libX11 [mclasen@localhost devel]$ rpmlint i386/dbus-libs-1.1.2-8.fc8.i386.rpm dbus-libs.i386: W: no-documentation dbus-libs.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided dbus Should be fine in this case, since dbus-libs requires dbus, ie it does provide dbus via a Requires. [mclasen@localhost devel]$ rpmlint i386/dbus-devel-1.1.2-8.fc8.i386.rpm dbus-devel.i386: W: no-documentation dbus-devel.i386: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib These are ignorable, rpmlint is confused about /lib vs /usr/lib Package name: ok Spec name: ok Packaging guidelines: - uses of BuildPreReq and PreReq should be removed - the conflict with cups is somewhat curious and deserves a little comment - the -devel subpackage should probably requires the -libs package, not the main package - should not mix $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot} - Should the service be stopped in %preun before deleting it ? The wiki seems to imply that - %{_datadir}/man should perhaps be %{_mandir} - -devel should probably requires devhelp for /usr/share/devhelp/books directory ownership license: ok license field: ok license file: ok spec language: ok spec legibility: ok upstream sources: ok buildable: ok excludearch: n/a build requires: ok locale handling: n/a shared library symlinks: ok relocatable: n/a directory ownership: see above %file list: ok file permissions: see above %clean: ok consistent macro use: see above large docs: are included in -devel, ok %doc content: ok headers: ok static libs: n/a pc files: ok shared libs: ok devel deps: ok libtool archives: ok gui apps: n/a directory ownership: see above %install: ok utf8 filenames: ok -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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