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: elfutils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225723 ------- Additional Comments From roland@xxxxxxxxxx 2008-02-20 03:22 EST ------- I've committed elfutils.spec updates to devel/ CVS, though there won't be a new build til the next elfutils release in a week or two. Please eyeball the spec changes. The %doc files don't really have to be copied into each subpackage, do they? They are in elfutils. I added versions to the obsoletes for the RHL8.0 version that was obsoleted in RH8.0.1 by elfutils-libelf. I added a Provides: libelf-devel to elfutils-libelf-devel. libelf is a pure DSO package, so an explicit provide does not make sense. (These obsoletes/provides are so old we might just punt them--we don't support upgrade paths from RHL8 anyway.) rpmlint is not clever enough to see that elfutils-libelf-devel depends on elfutils-libelf-%{_arch} because a plain elfutils-libelf dependency is not really sufficient for biarch machines. I think I fixed all the cosmetic items. -- 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