[Bug 226301] Merge Review: planner

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226301


Jon Ciesla <limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx
         AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx




--- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla <limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  2008-09-17 12:32:09 EDT ---
rpmlint on SRPM: clean

rpmlint on RPMS:

planner.i386: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/planner.schemas
A non-executable file in your package is being installed in /etc, but is not a
configuration file. All non-executable files in /etc should be configuration
files. Mark the file as %config in the spec file.

Probably ok?

planner.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided mrproject
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause
unnecessary dependency breakage.  If the obsoleting package is not a
compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides.

planner.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided libmrproject
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause
unnecessary dependency breakage.  If the obsoleting package is not a
compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides.

planner.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided libmrproject-devel
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause
unnecessary dependency breakage.  If the obsoleting package is not a
compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides.

Fix.

planner-devel.i386: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

planner-eds.i386: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

I have to think there's SOMETHING you could move over to these from the main
package?

planner-eds.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/evolution-data-server-1.2/extensions/libecalbackendplanner.so
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.

Is this a false positive?  If so, file an rpmlint bug.

Otherwise, full review looks good, no other blockers.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]