Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Re-Review Request: jed: an editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189374
------- Additional Comments From notting(a)redhat.com 2006-06-02 21:53 EST -------
(In reply to comment #3)
Just did a quick mock build (development, x86_64). rpmlint is
unhappy:
W: jed prereq-use /sbin/install-info
* Tue May 4 2004 Bill Nottingham <notting(a)redhat.com> 0.99.16-4
- remove info page (#115826)
Oops.
W: jed buildprereq-use slang-devel >= 2.0, autoconf,
libselinux-devel
BuildRequires: should be used instead.
Syntax changed.
W: jed hardcoded-path-in-buildroot-tag
/var/tmp/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root
Please use %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
as the buildroot.
Fixed.
W: jed patch-not-applied Patch3: jed-multilib.patch
I assume you have reasons for not applying patch3.
Didn't apply, forgot to remove it from the spec.
E: jed obsolete-not-provided jed-common
E: jed obsolete-not-provided jed-xjed
You should provide these so that upgrades work and so that any packages which
might depend on them don't break.
These were obsoleted in 2002. Nothing should require them. (And, technically,
it doens't really obsolete xjed - we just stopped building it because it's
a bad idea.)
E: jed binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/jed
['/usr/lib64']
rpath is bad and should be removed if at all possible. I'll dig into this
further if necessary.
Nah, I'll dig it out. Probably bad autoconf somewhere.
W: jed doc-file-dependency
/usr/share/doc/jed-0.99.18/doc/tm/rtl/tm-sort.sl
/usr/bin/env
W: jed doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/jed-0.99.18/doc/tm/rtl/whatelse.sl
/usr/bin/env
Documentation should not be executable.
Fixed.
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.