https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1337434
--- Comment #10 from Matthias Clasen <[email protected]> --- And here is the rpmlint output for the binary rpms: $ rpmlint flatpak-*x86_64.rpm flatpak.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sandboxed -> sandboxes, sand boxed, sand-boxed flatpak.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.freedesktop.Flatpak.SystemHelper.conf flatpak.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/profile.d/flatpak.sh flatpak-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/flatpak-0.6.0/libglnx/glnx-libcontainer.c flatpak-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/flatpak-0.6.0/libglnx/glnx-console.h flatpak-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/flatpak-0.6.0/libglnx/glnx-console.c flatpak-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US config -> con fig, con-fig, configure flatpak-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided xdg-app-devel flatpak-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib flatpak-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libflatpak -> inflatable flatpak-libs.x86_64: E: missing-call-to-chdir-with-chroot /usr/lib64/flatpak/bwrap flatpak-libs.x86_64: E: missing-call-to-chdir-with-chroot /usr/lib64/libflatpak.so.0.600.0 flatpak-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 8 warnings. The incorrect fsf addresses should probably be reported back to libglnx upstream, but I don't think that blocks the review. The missing-call-to-chdir-with-chroot warning is just wrong. The code calls chdir right before and after chroot. -- 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] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/[email protected]
