[Bug 712624] Review Request: aeskulap - A full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Jun 30 20:34:35 UTC 2011
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=712624
--- Comment #5 from Richard Shaw <hobbes1069 at gmail.com> 2011-06-30 16:34:34 EDT ---
Ok, I've started working through the guidelines. Here's the rpmlint output from
all packages generated by rpmbuild:
$ rpmlint aeskulap-*.rpm
aeskulap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gtkmm
aeskulap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US glademm -> glade mm,
glade-mm, glade
aeskulap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gconfmm -> confirm,
conformal, conformism
aeskulap.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch7: %{name}-configure.patch
aeskulap.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gtkmm
aeskulap.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US glademm -> glade mm,
glade-mm, glade
aeskulap.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gconfmm -> confirm,
conformal, conformism
None of the spelling-error's are real
aeskulap.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/aeskulap.schemas
Looking at my system this seems to be the right place, perhaps rpmlint should
be updated..
aeskulap.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/aeskulap-0.2.2/NEWS
We knew this one would be a problem, I think it's safe to ignore.
aeskulap.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary aeskulap
I assume this is a GUI only program in which case a man page would not be
expected?
aeskulap.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%pre rm
aeskulap.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%post rm
This obviously are part of the %gconf... macros which we're not responsible for
so they can be ignored.
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 11 warnings.
--
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.
More information about the package-review
mailing list