https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2276294
--- Comment #3 from Jonathan Steffan <[email protected]> --- [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License", "Boost Software License 1.0 and/or MIT License", "BSD 3-Clause License". 54 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in BSD-3-Clause for cpplint The other licenses seem to fall to the tests and you've patched inline to use system libs. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/cmake [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/cmake cmake-filesystem [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. What about deps/cpplint.py? [!]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. What about tools/windows/premake5.exe? [xdg]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in tinygltf-devel , tinygltf-examples Auto-complete fail, this is good. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2276294 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202276294%23c3 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
