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: seekwatcher - IO visualization with blktrace https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=285571 panemade@xxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |panemade@xxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |fedora-review? ------- Additional Comments From panemade@xxxxxxxxx 2007-11-30 22:15 EST ------- (In reply to comment #17) > And keeping up with chris.... > > http://people.redhat.com/esandeen/seekwatcher-rpm/seekwatcher-0.9-1.fc8.src.rpm with this SRPM I got, seekwatcher.noarch: I: checking seekwatcher.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.9 0.9-1.fc8 The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. seekwatcher.src: I: checking seekwatcher.src: W: no-%build-section The spec file does not contain a %build section. Even if some packages don't directly need it, section markers may be overridden in rpm's configuration to provide additional "under the hood" functionality, such as injection of automatic -debuginfo subpackages. Add the section, even if empty. Also, make sure to keep timestamps http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-0239576e441f9ef53d175c4aec8c12868dffb5ab And if you like you can use defattr as defattr(-,root,root,-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review