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: redhat-lsb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226363
hliu(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |hliu(a)redhat.com
------- Additional Comments From hliu(a)redhat.com 2008-06-27 01:53 EST -------
This is a pre-review for convincing one of the sponsors of approving my application:
I ran rpmlint against SRPM of the latest redhat-lsb, and I got following
errors and warnings:
E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/lsb/install_initd
A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib,
/usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}.
E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/lsb/remove_initd
A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib,
/usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}.
E: hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/lsb
A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib,
/usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}.
E: hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/lsb/install_initd
A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib,
/usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}.
E: hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/lib/lsb/remove_initd
A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib,
/usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}.
E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/lsb
A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib,
/usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}.
E: hardcoded-library-path in /lib/lsb
A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib,
/usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}.
W: macro-in-%changelog endif
Macros are expanded in %changelog too, which can in unfortunate cases lead
to the package not building at all, or other subtle unexpected conditions that
affect the build. Even when that doesn't happen, the expansion results in
possibly "rewriting history" on subsequent package revisions and generally
odd entries eg. in source rpms, which is rarely wanted. Avoid use of macros
in %changelog altogether, or use two '%'s to escape them, like '%%foo'.
W: invalid-license GPL
The value of the License tag was not recognized. Known values are:
"AFL", "Affero GPL", "ASL 1.0", "ASL 1.0+",
"ASL 1.1", "ASL 1.1+", "ASL 2.0",
"ASL 2.0+", "APSL 2.0", "APSL 2.0+", "Artistic
clarified", "Boost", "BSD with
advertising", "BSD", "CeCILL", "CDDL", "CPL",
"Condor", "Cryptix", "EPL",
"eCos", "EFL 2.0", "EFL 2.0+", "EU Datagrid",
"GPL+", "GPLv2", "GPLv2+",
"GPLv3", "GPLv3+", "IBM", "iMatix", "Intel
ACPI", "Interbase", "Jabber",
"LaTeX", "LGPL+", "LGPLv2", "LGPLv2 with
exceptions", "LGPLv2+", "LGPLv3",
"LGPLv3+", "LPL", "mecab-ipadic", "MIT",
"MPLv1.0", "MPLv1.0+", "MPLv1.1",
"MPLv1.1+", "NCSA", "NGPL", "NOSL",
"Netscape", "Nokia", "OpenLDAP", "OSL
1.0", "OSL 1.0+", "OpenSSL", "Phorum", "PHP",
"Public Domain", "Python",
"QPL", "RPSL", "Ruby", "Sleepycat",
"SMLNJL", "SISSL", "SPL", "Vim",
"VNLSL",
"VSL", "W3C", "WTFPL", "wxWindows",
"xinetd", "Zend", "ZPLv1.0", "ZPLv1.0+",
"ZPLv2.0", "ZPLv2.0+", "zlib", "CDL",
"FBSDDL", "GFDL", "Open Publication",
"CC-BY", "CC-BY-SA", "DSL", "Free Art",
"Arphic", "SIL Open Font",
"Redistributable, no modification permitted", "Freely redistributable
without
restriction".
--
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.