Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com> 2012-04-05 15:34:59 EDT ---
- rpmlint checks return:
sabayon.spec:98: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 98)
The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic
annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both.
Trivial to fix.
sabayon.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
A shared object soname provides is provided by a file in a path from which
other packages should not directly load shared objects from. Such shared
objects should thus not be depended on and they should not result in provides
in the containing package. Get rid of the provides if appropriate, for
example by filtering it out during build. Note that in some cases this may
require disabling rpmbuild's internal dependency generator.
sabayon.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%postun userdel
FIX. We don't remove users, ever.
sabayon-apply.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
Executables must not be marked as config files because that may prevent
upgrades from working correctly. If you need to be able to customize an
executable, make it for example read a config file in /etc/sysconfig.
sabayon-apply.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
This text file has executable bits set or is located in a path dedicated for
executables, but lacks a shebang and cannot thus be executed. If the file is
meant to be an executable script, add the shebang, otherwise remove the
executable bits or move the file elsewhere.
sabayon-apply.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sabayon-apply
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
Fix if possible.
Lots of wrong fsf address, file upstream.
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license ( GPLv2+ ) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file
So it's just what's from rpmlint, let me know if you want me to commit any
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.