============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 configuration: /opt/testing/lib64/python3.11/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/cron-whitelist.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/dbus-services.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/device-files-whitelist.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/licenses.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/opensuse.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/pam-modules.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/permissions-whitelist.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/pie-executables.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/polkit-rules-whitelist.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/scoring.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/security.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/sudoers-whitelist.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/sysctl-whitelist.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/systemd-tmpfiles.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/world-writable-whitelist.toml /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/zypper-plugins.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring-strict.override.toml rpmlintrc: /home/abuild/rpmbuild/SOURCES/Mesa-rpmlintrc checks: 41, packages: 22 Mesa-drivers.src: E: unused-rpmlintrc-filter "shlib-policy-name-error" Mesa-drivers.src: E: unused-rpmlintrc-filter "libXvMC_nouveau.*library-without-ldconfig-postin" Mesa-drivers.src: E: unused-rpmlintrc-filter "libXvMC_nouveau.*library-without-ldconfig-postun" Mesa-drivers.src: E: unused-rpmlintrc-filter "libXvMC_r600.*library-without-ldconfig-postin" Mesa-drivers.src: E: unused-rpmlintrc-filter "libXvMC_r600.*library-without-ldconfig-postun" Mesa-dri.aarch64: W: non-etc-or-var-file-marked-as-conffile /usr/share/drirc.d/00-mesa-defaults.conf Mesa-dri.aarch64: W: non-etc-or-var-file-marked-as-conffile /usr/share/drirc.d/00-radv-defaults.conf A file not in /etc or /var is marked as being a configuration file (%config). Please put your configuration files in /etc or /var. Mesa.spec: W: no-%check-section The spec file does not contain an %check section. Please check if the package has a testsuite and what it takes to enable the testsuite as part of the package build. If it is not possible to run it in the build environment (OBS/koji) or no testsuite exists, then please ignore this warning. You should not insert an empty %check section. Mesa-dri.aarch64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libgallium-24.2.7.so Mesa-libRusticlOpenCL.aarch64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libRusticlOpenCL.so.1.0.0 This package contains a library and provides no %postun scriptlet containing a call to ldconfig. Mesa-dri.aarch64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/libgallium-24.2.7.so Mesa-libRusticlOpenCL.aarch64: E: library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/libRusticlOpenCL.so.1.0.0 This package contains a library and provides no %post scriptlet containing a call to ldconfig. Mesa-drivers.src: E: invalid-spec-name The spec file name (without the .spec suffix) must match the package name ('Name:' tag). Mesa-dri.aarch64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libvulkan1 Mesa-libOpenCL.aarch64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libclc(llvm19) Mesa-libRusticlOpenCL.aarch64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libclc(llvm19) You must let rpm find the library dependencies by itself. Do not put unneeded explicit Requires: tags. Mesa-vulkan-overlay.aarch64: E: env-script-interpreter (Badness: 9) /usr/bin/mesa-overlay-control.py /usr/bin/env python3 This script uses 'env' as an interpreter. For the rpm runtime dependency detection to work, the shebang #!/usr/bin/env needs to be patched into #!/usr/bin/ otherwise the package dependency generator merely adds a dependency on /usr/bin/env rather than the actual interpreter /usr/bin/. Alternatively, if the file should not be executed, then ensure that it is not marked as executable or don't install it in a path that is reserved for executables. Mesa-libOpenCL.aarch64: E: devel-file-in-non-devel-package (Badness: 50) /usr/lib64/libMesaOpenCL.so Mesa-libRusticlOpenCL.aarch64: E: devel-file-in-non-devel-package (Badness: 50) /usr/lib64/libRusticlOpenCL.so libvdpau_nouveau.aarch64: E: devel-file-in-non-devel-package (Badness: 50) /usr/lib64/vdpau/libvdpau_nouveau.so libvdpau_r600.aarch64: E: devel-file-in-non-devel-package (Badness: 50) /usr/lib64/vdpau/libvdpau_r600.so libvdpau_radeonsi.aarch64: E: devel-file-in-non-devel-package (Badness: 50) /usr/lib64/vdpau/libvdpau_radeonsi.so libvdpau_virtio_gpu.aarch64: E: devel-file-in-non-devel-package (Badness: 50) /usr/lib64/vdpau/libvdpau_virtio_gpu.so A file that is needed only e.g. when developing or building software is included in a non-devel package. These files should go in devel packages. Check time report (>1% & >0.1s): Check Duration (in s) Fraction (in %) Checked files ExtractRpm 2.0 49.0 BinariesCheck 0.7 16.4 SignatureCheck 0.6 14.2 SharedLibraryPolicyCheck 0.3 6.2 SpecCheck 0.2 4.0 TagsCheck 0.1 3.6 BuildRootAndDateCheck 0.1 3.3 TOTAL 4.2 100.0 22 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 20 errors, 3 warnings, 102 filtered, 322 badness; has taken 4.3 s