Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707132 Ville Skyttä <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |[email protected] AssignedTo|[email protected] |[email protected] Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Ville Skyttä <[email protected]> 2011-05-24 12:24:55 EDT --- > +- add Provides This is not correct, because the package is not compatible with the previous tanukiwrapper package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Renaming.2Freplacing_existing_packages > +- removed epoch from BR This is not correct either, because java-javadoc, java, and java-devel-openjdk do have an Epoch set: $ rpm -q --provides java-1.6.0-openjdk java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel java-1.6.0-openjdk-javadoc | grep -E 'java(-javadoc|-devel-openjdk)? =' java = 1:1.6.0 java-devel-openjdk = 1:1.6.0.0 java-javadoc = 1:1.6.0.0-52.1.9.7.fc14 > +- apply patch1 in way, which does not confuse rpmlint This results in modifying files in the build root, which is not okay. The previous way was fine, the rpmlint warning can just be ignored. Note that this has already broken the patch included in the package, comparing my previous package revision with yours (with rpmdev-diff) highlights it: -+ System.load( new File( "@LIBPATH@", file ).toString() ); ++ System.load( new File( "/usr/lib64/java-service-wrapper", file ).toString() ); ...so the /usr/lib64 patch got hardwired in the patch. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
