[Bug 457210] Review Request: dpkg - Package maintenance system for Debian Linux

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=457210


Rakesh Pandit <rakesh.pandit at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rakesh.pandit at gmail.com




--- Comment #5 from Rakesh Pandit <rakesh.pandit at gmail.com>  2008-08-16 09:24:24 EDT ---

GPLv2+ looks to me correct license.

[rpmbuild at rocky i386]$ rp dpkg-1.14.20-4.fc9.i386.rpm 
dpkg.i386: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.

[rpmbuild at rocky i386]$ rp dpkg-dev-1.14.20-4.fc9.i386.rpm 
dpkg-dev.i386: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.

[rpmbuild at rocky i386]$ rp dselect-1.14.20-4.fc9.i386.rpm 
dselect.i386: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.


package does not own some directories 
1. /etc/dpkg/
2. /usr/lib/dpkg/
3. /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Dpkg/
4. /usr/share/dpkg/

It looks like SPEC file length can be reduced by using regular exp or some
constructs which prevent similar patterns.

-- 
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.