On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 07:17:00PM +0100, Miro Hrončok wrote: > On 11. 11. 22 17:24, Sandro wrote: > >I'm not quite sure why pulling in an additional supplemental > >dependency would be considered a breaking change. Is it because > >rpmlint behaves differently with the new license definitions? > > Yes. Suppose I am running a Fedora 36 system with rpmlint installed > and I use it to validate spec files for RHEL 9. When I install > rpmlint-fedora-license-data, a huge bulk of licenses that were not > valid when I started to use Fedora 36 and that are not valid for > RHEL 9 are suddenly valid. This issue sounds like it'd be better solved by using RHEL 9 for the checks. Or the rather more complicated solution of creating a new ‘rpmlint --release=rhel-9’ flag. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com libguestfs lets you edit virtual machines. Supports shell scripting, bindings from many languages. http://libguestfs.org _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
