Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: uuid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192564 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-23 18:32 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > As for rpath, my understanding is that we should do what we can to eliminate > it > but that if it's simply not possible then it won't keep the package out. But > after patching the spec as I suggested I see no trace of rpath. That > technique > has worked for me in the past. Weird. I just tried it again, and it works this time. I must have changed the wrong make line or something. > About the unstripped libraries, it looks like they aren't executable, so they > don't get stripped. I've seen this in the past, and a chmod 755 has fixed it > up, but while looking through /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip* I saw this: > > # Strip ELF shared objects > # Please note we don't restrict our search to executable files because > # our libraries are not (should not be, at least) +x. That's interesting. Just about everything else in my /usr/lib64 is executable. And, sure enough, adding in a chmod gets rid of that rpmlint warning. Try -3, please. -- 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. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedorafirstname.lastname@example.org http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review