Repocop reports by acl

	packager	rpm id	test	status	message
	savoptik	java-26-openjdk-devel-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64	alt-alternatives-vs-ghost	info	Since alternatives 0.4 the practice to own alternative symlinks as ghost files is deprecated. the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/java-openjdk is an alternative in package java-27-openjdk-devel-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64. Consider removing the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/java-openjdk. jdk.
	savoptik	java-26-openjdk-devel-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64	bin-permissions	info	not executable file /usr/bin/serialver
	savoptik	java-26-openjdk-headless-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64	alt-alternatives-vs-ghost	info	Since alternatives 0.4 the practice to own alternative symlinks as ghost files is deprecated. the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/jre-openjdk is an alternative in package java-27-openjdk-headless-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64. Consider removing the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/jre-openjdk. jdk.
	savoptik	java-26-openjdk-headless-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64	bin-permissions	info	not executable file /usr/bin/rmiregistry
	savoptik	java-26-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64	rpm-filesystem-conflict-symlink-symlink	warn	value of symlink /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/88/322d0f686000e5500e889800cb8b01a49eb04b.debug is different from the same symlink in the package java-27-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64. Moreover, the packages have no explicit conflicts with each other. You should add explicit conflicts, or, if conflicts are avoidable, consider using alternatives.
	savoptik	java-26-openjdk-javadoc-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64	alt-alternatives-vs-ghost	info	Since alternatives 0.4 the practice to own alternative symlinks as ghost files is deprecated. the ghost file /usr/share/javadoc/java is an alternative in package java-27-openjdk-javadoc-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64. Consider removing the ghost file /usr/share/javadoc/java. ava.
	savoptik	java-26-openjdk-javadoc-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64	arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share	info	The package has a significant amount of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	savoptik	java-27-openjdk-devel-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64	alt-alternatives-vs-ghost	info	Since alternatives 0.4 the practice to own alternative symlinks as ghost files is deprecated. the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/java-27-openjdk is an alternative in package java-27-openjdk-devel-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64. Consider removing the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/java-27-openjdk.
	savoptik	java-27-openjdk-devel-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64	bin-permissions	info	not executable file /usr/bin/serialver
	savoptik	java-27-openjdk-headless-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64	alt-alternatives-vs-ghost	info	Since alternatives 0.4 the practice to own alternative symlinks as ghost files is deprecated. the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/jre-27-openjdk is an alternative in package java-27-openjdk-headless-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64. Consider removing the ghost file /usr/lib/jvm/jre-27-openjdk.
	savoptik	java-27-openjdk-headless-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64	bin-permissions	info	not executable file /usr/bin/rmiregistry
	savoptik	java-27-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64	rpm-filesystem-conflict-symlink-symlink	warn	value of symlink /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/88/322d0f686000e5500e889800cb8b01a49eb04b.debug is different from the same symlink in the package java-26-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-26.0.2.1.1-alt1.x86_64. Moreover, the packages have no explicit conflicts with each other. You should add explicit conflicts, or, if conflicts are avoidable, consider using alternatives.
	savoptik	java-27-openjdk-javadoc-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64	alt-alternatives-vs-ghost	info	Since alternatives 0.4 the practice to own alternative symlinks as ghost files is deprecated. the ghost file /usr/share/javadoc/java is an alternative in package java-27-openjdk-javadoc-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64. Consider removing the ghost file /usr/share/javadoc/java. ava.
	savoptik	java-27-openjdk-javadoc-27.0.0.35.1-alt1.x86_64	arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share	info	The package has a significant amount of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	savoptik	ru_emacspeak-50.0.22-alt6.x86_64	arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share	info	The package has a significant amount of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	savoptik	ru_emacspeak-classic-50.0.22-alt6.x86_64	arch-dep-package-consists-of-usr-share	info	The package consists of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	savoptik	ru_emacspeak-pan-chimes-50.0.22-alt6.x86_64	arch-dep-package-consists-of-usr-share	info	The package consists of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	savoptik	skara-20260810-alt5.4b951a3c.x86_64	rpm-filesystem-conflict-file-file	warn	There are file conflicts with the package git-extras-7.5.0-alt1.noarch, for example, /usr/bin/git-fork (4 file conflicts in total). Moreover, the packages have no explicit conflicts with each other. You should add explicit conflicts, or, if conflicts are avoidable, consider using alternatives.
	sovtouch	beszel-agent-0.21.0-alt1.x86_64	systemd-but-no-native-init	experimental	The package have native systemd file(s) but no SysV init scripts.
	sovtouch	beszel-hub-0.21.0-alt1.x86_64	systemd-but-no-native-init	experimental	The package have native systemd file(s) but no SysV init scripts.
	sovtouch	emoji-picker-2.31.1-alt1.noarch	freedesktop-categories	warn	Menu-related Additional Categories (http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html) not found in /usr/share/applications/emoji-picker.desktop. Please add it or report a bug against this test if you already have registered one (not including menu unrelated ones as Core or Qt).
	sovtouch	jcov-3.0-alt4.x86_64	arch-dep-package-consists-of-usr-share	info	The package consists of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	sovtouch	jtharness-6.0-alt2.x86_64	arch-dep-package-consists-of-usr-share	info	The package consists of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	sovtouch	jtreg-8.3+1-alt2.x86_64	arch-dep-package-has-big-usr-share	info	The package has a significant amount of architecture-independent data in /usr/share, while it is an architecture-dependent package. This is wasteful of mirror space and bandwidth, as we then end up with multiple copies of this data, one for each architecture. If the data in /usr/share is not architecture-independent, it is a policy violation, and in this case, you should move that data elsewhere.
	sovtouch	lua5.4-module-luacov-0.17.0-alt1_lr1.noarch	buildroot	fail	found paths to buildroot: /usr/bin/luacov: LUAROCKS_SYSCONFDIR='/etc/luarocks' exec '/usr/bin/lua5.4' -e 'package.path="/usr/src/tmp/lua5.4-module-luacov-buildroot/usr/share/lua/5.4/?.lua;/usr/src/tmp/lua5.4-module-luacov-buildroot/usr/share/lua/5.4/?/init.lua;/usr/src/.luarocks/share/lua/5.4/?.lua;/usr/src/.luarocks/share/lua/5.4/?/init.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.4/?.lua;/usr/share/lua/5.4/?/init.lua;"..package.path;package.cpath="/usr/src/tmp/lua5.4-module-luacov-buildroot/usr/lib64/lua/5.4/?.so;/usr/src/.luarocks/lib64/lua/5.4/?.so;/usr/lib64/lua/5.4/?.so;"..package.cpath;local k,l,_=pcall(require,"luarocks.loader") _=k and l.add_context("luacov","scm-1")' '/usr/src/tmp/lua5.4-module-luacov-buildroot/usr/lib/luarocks/rocks-5.4/luacov/scm-1/bin/luacov' "$@"