[Bug 500506] Review Request: 389-adminutil - renamed from adminutil

[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=500506





--- Comment #2 from Rich Megginson <rmeggins at redhat.com>  2009-05-18 15:57:21 EDT ---
Updated

Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2

md5sum 389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2 
e84240547e2f7b97d0576bcb85c06a57  389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2
sha1sum 389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2 
17581245a0d95b3f7cda90c3ed83b7984afe9b2c  389-adminutil-1.1.8.tar.bz2

I would like to waive or otherwise accept the rpmlint results.

This is the output I get from rpmlint - same results with both rpmlint 0.85 and
0.87 on Fedora 10

389-adminutil.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libadmsslutil.so.1.1.8
exit at GLIBC_2.0
389-adminutil.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libadminutil.so.1.1.8
exit at GLIBC_2.0

This is ok - these are functions specifically for handling fatal errors on
behalf of the calling application.

389-adminutil-devel.i386: W: no-documentation

The devel package has no documentation - it's all in the base package

rpmlint -v
/var/lib/mock/fedora-10-i386/result/389-adminutil-1.1.8-2.fc10.src.rpm 
389-adminutil.src: I: checking
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

I'm not sure where the other errors are coming from.  I do know that
libadminutil does not strictly need to link directly against ssl, nss,
ssldap60, or ldif60 - but all applications that want to support SSL (which is
all of them) will need to also link with libadmsslutil which does require the
SSL libs.  ldif60 is not strictly needed but it doesn't hurt to link with it.

The ICU dependencies are required to link with ICU even though rpmlint says
they are not needed.

-- 
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.