Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: libvpd - C++ library for system vpd access


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=307891





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2007-10-19 01:46 EST -------
MUSTFIX:

* Hard-coded /usr/lib in %files
Use %{_libdir} instead, otherwise your package will not build on multilib'ed
platforms.

* Package installs autoheader (config.h)
You must not install autoheaders. autoheaders are not designed to be installed.

This package's config.h (correctly) is only being used locally and not being
used by public headers, so simply taking it out of *_HEADERS in your Makefile.am
would fix this issue.

* rpmlint libvpd-debuginfo-1.3.5-2.fc7.i386.rpm 
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/logger.cpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/libvpd-1/component.hpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/vpddbenv.cpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/dataitem.cpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/vpdretriever.cpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/libvpd-1/vpddbenv.hpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/libvpd-1/vpdretriever.hpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/component.cpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/libvpd-1/dataitem.hpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/libvpd-1/logger.hpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/vpdexception.cpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/libvpd-1/lsvpd.hpp
libvpd-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/libvpd-1.3.5/src/libvpd-1/vpdexception.hpp

The permissions on these files are bogus. chmod -x them.

* rpmlint libvpd-1.3.5-2.fc7.i386.rpm 
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/libvpd-1/Source.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package 
/usr/include/libvpd-1/component.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/libvpd-1/system.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/include/libvpd-1/vpdretriever.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package 
/usr/include/libvpd-1/dataitem.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/libvpd-1/lsvpd.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/libvpd-1/debug.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/include/libvpd-1/vpdexception.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/include/libvpd-1/lsvpd_error_codes.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/libvpd-1/config.h
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/libvpd-1/logger.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package 
/usr/include/libvpd-1/vpddbenv.hpp
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libvpd_cxx.so
libvpd.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/include/libvpd-1/helper_functions.hpp

Please split this package into a *-devel subpackage (libvpd-devel) and a run
time package (libvpd)

* rpmlint libvpd-1.3.5-2.fc7.i386.rpm
libvpd.i386: E: no-changelogname-tag

Please add changelog entries.

* rpmlint libvpd-1.3.5-2.fc7.i386.rpm
libvpd.i386: W: invalid-license LGPL
Fedora wants you to use LGPLv2+ (Your package is licensed LGPL 2.1 or any later)



-- 
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.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

Reply via email to