[lug] rpm spec: ldconfig-symlink
stimits at comcast.net
Mon Jul 18 16:44:20 MDT 2005
> Seems like you should treat rpmlint more like a tool to help you see and
> think about your package and less like it has to always be "clean".
> Perhaps that's why there's no documentation for it? Or is rpmlint
> somehow involved in the build process and stopping it?
I think you are right on this. At this time I know my package works
right and provides the proper things. I worry about rpmlint in part
because the fedora-extras wiki asks that rpmlint be used. Another part
of me feels like an rpmlint warning is the same as fingernails scraping
on a chalkboard...my programmer half wants to scream at a single
warning, but packaging is forcing me to consider a "new model" of
thinking (as in "packaging is not an exact science").
At this point I know for a fact that rpmlint has a few bugs, e.g., it
can't properly detect relocatable code in libraries compiled with gcc 4.
I sent a note to a listed maintainer, but I doubt I'll get a reply.
D. Stimits, stimits AT comcast DOT net
More information about the LUG