I am in the process of an informal review attempt of rugged  and I
bumped into some errors that rpmlint found and could be false positives.
I would like your opinion.
1) explicit-lib-dependency libgit2
You must let rpm find the library dependencies by itself. Do not put
unneeded explicit Requires: tags.
I have found only this section in the wiki which is a little
relevant, but some example would be better.
The permissions of all libraries I have in /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/ are 755
so I guess it is safe to ignore.
This package installs an ELF binary in the /usr/share hierarchy, which
is reserved for architecture-independent files.
Additionally to 3, running mock it shows that:
DEBUG: *** WARNING: identical binaries are copied, not linked:
DEBUG: and /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/rugged-0.16.0/lib/rubygem-rugged/rugged.so
Are they both needed, is it safe to ignore?
GPG : 0xABF99BE5
In looking over the release notes for Rails 4, it looks like it has a
hard requirement on Bundler. Is that the case?
I have been working on patching out Bundler's initialization from
Gitorious in preparation for packaging it, so that I could avoid the
problems associated with hard dependencies on specific minor version
numbers for each Gem. I wonder if the sisyphean boulder is just going
to roll back down the other side of the hill if Rails 4 itself will