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=587011
Miloslav Trmač mitr@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review- |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Miloslav Trmač mitr@redhat.com 2010-09-02 14:28:24 EDT --- rpmlint:
tboot.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
False positive.
tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_crtpol tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary acminfo tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_crtpol2 tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_crtpconf tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tpmnv_lock tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary parse_err tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tpmnv_relindex tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_readpol tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_mlehash tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_crtpollist tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_crtpolelt tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lcp_writepol tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tpmnv_defindex tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tpmnv_getcap tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tb_polgen tboot.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary txt-stat
Nice to have, not required. Please include the existing documentation, at least.
Licensing: Pretty close to violating https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Packages_which_are_not_us... , but fine IMO (the sinit modules are not used "in the runtime system environment").
Documentation: Should lctptools/Linux_LCP_Tools_User_Manual.pdf, lcptools/lcptools2.txt be included in the binary packages?
All of the problems below must be fixed:
Licensing: printk.h is under GPLv2, contradicting the spec license
Per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Trademarks_in_Summary_or_... , the (R) marks should "never" be present.
The ExclusiveArch needs to be more general (probably using %ix86) if you want the package to be available on 32-bit x86.
There should be an useful debuginfo package (do not use -s in install(1)). I'm not sure if/how to handle debuginfo for /boot/tboot.gz , perhaps check if/how the kernel package (or the old xen packages) does it.