https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1279527

Jan Synacek <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+



--- Comment #5 from Jan Synacek <[email protected]> ---
New round of the review. I'm just going to pick the non-addressed / new issues.


[ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     libosmocore-debuginfo

This looks like a bug in fedora-review/rpm to me... Or am I missing something?

(In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #3)
> (In reply to Jan Synacek from comment #2)
> > 
> > Rpmlint (installed packages)
> > ----------------------------
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmocodec.so.0.0.0 libosmocodec.so.0()(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmoctrl.so.0.0.0 libosmoctrl.so.0()(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmovty.so.3.0.0 libosmovty.so.3()(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmogsm.so.5.1.0 libosmogsm.so.5(LIBOSMOGSM_1.0)(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmogsm.so.5.1.0 libosmogsm.so.5()(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmocore.so.6.0.0 libosmocore.so.6()(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmosim.so.0.0.0 libosmosim.so.0()(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmogb.so.4.0.0 libosmogb.so.4(LIBOSMOGB_1.0)(64bit)
> > libosmocore.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
> > /usr/lib64/libosmogb.so.4.0.0 libosmogb.so.4()(64bit)
> > 
> > I have no idea if these are valid complaints or fedora-review just had a
> > brain-fart...
> > 
> I can't reproduce these, no idea why they were flagged as private shared
> objects. The shared objects are public and they are in the right location.
> Could you provide more details regarding this?

Well, I saw those errors in the review log. I can't see them in the new
version, so I blame it on the fedora-review tool:)


All issues appear to have been addressed. Approving.

-- 
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

Reply via email to