https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=949324
David Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org |dw...@infradead.org --- Comment #12 from David Woodhouse <dw...@infradead.org> --- Working through the rest of the review guidelines... should the pam_oath package require %{_libdir}/security (or 'pam')? And should the Requires: Requires: libpskc = %{version}-%{release} in libpskc-devel actually be Requires: libpskc{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} (and other packages likewise)? In addition to the rpmlint warnings in comment 11, I also see the following: libpskc.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpskc.so.0.0.1 /lib64/libltdl.so.7 libpskc.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpskc.so.0.0.1 /lib64/libxslt.so.1 libpskc.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpskc.so.0.0.1 /lib64/libz.so.1 libpskc.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpskc.so.0.0.1 /lib64/libdl.so.2 libpskc.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpskc.so.0.0.1 /lib64/libm.so.6 Other than that, I think everything looks fine. If you can submit an update with these fixed I'll go ahead and approve it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DnoTvZP2jC&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review