Bug 450442
Summary: | Review Request: rubygem-tiddlywiki_cp - Copy tiddlers to files and vice versa | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jesse Keating <jkeating> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | dcantrell, fedora-package-review, notting, opensource |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2009-04-19 00:24:30 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Jesse Keating
2008-06-08 14:43:19 UTC
It is easier to understand what you are writing about the rpmlint output, if you also attach it: rubygem-tiddlywiki_cp.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tiddlywiki_cp-0.5.3/scripts/txt2html 0644 Don't you get this error? rubygem-tiddlywiki_cp.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tiddlywiki_cp-0.5.3/test/content/ignored# rubygem-tiddlywiki_cp.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tiddlywiki_cp-0.5.3/test/content/a rubygem-tiddlywiki_cp.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tiddlywiki_cp-0.5.3/test/content/d/CVS rubygem-tiddlywiki_cp.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tiddlywiki_cp-0.5.3/test/content/b rubygem-tiddlywiki_cp.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/tiddlywiki_cp-0.5.3/test/content/a.div My rpmbuild also complains, that some files are mentioned multiple times in %files: %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ %doc %{geminstdir}/README.txt The first path already includes the second one, because at the beginning of the spec, %geminstdir is defined as follows: %define geminstdir %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version} Or in other words: %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ can be directly written as %{geminstdir}/ in %files. From the Review Guidelines: | - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. - Btw. the e-mail address in %changelog is probably only valid on your local machine. Are you still interested in a review? Sorry, no, it is no longer necessary for building the package I was working on. |