https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1096082
--- Comment #6 from Petr Lautrbach <[email protected]> --- > Issues: > ======= > - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. > Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/crypto-policies/profiles > See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles ... > [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. > Note: No known owner of /usr/share/crypto-policies > [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/crypto-policies line 45 should be probably without profiles: 45 %dir %{_datadir}/crypto-policies > [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. is there a reason why the package has different name from upstream? > [!]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. > Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments It could be nice to have a comment with instructions how to create a source tarball. > Rpmlint > ------- > crypto-policies.noarch: E: script-without-shebang > /usr/share/crypto-policies/profiles/DEFAULT.settings > crypto-policies.noarch: E: script-without-shebang > /usr/share/crypto-policies/profiles/LEGACY.settings > crypto-policies.noarch: E: script-without-shebang > /usr/share/crypto-policies/profiles/FUTURE.settings Given that those files are for including, not shell scripts, wouldn't be better have them without executable bit? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
