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
