Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477958 --- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter <fabian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-12-27 06:57:56 EDT --- The rpmlint output... [fab@laptop024 i386]$ rpmlint id3mtag* id3mtag.i386: W: invalid-license Two-clause BSD id3mtag-debuginfo.i386: E: empty-debuginfo-package id3mtag-debuginfo.i386: W: invalid-license Two-clause BSD 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. [fab@laptop024 SRPMS]$ rpmlint id3mtag-0.78-1.fc9.src.rpm id3mtag.src: W: invalid-license Two-clause BSD 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. For more details check https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing Some comments on your spec file - CHANGES, COPYING, and so on should be placed in the %files section %doc CHANGES COPYING %doc %{_docdir}/%{name} looks a bit unusual - Don't mix $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot} https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS - Is 'Prefix: %{_usr}' really needed? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Relocatable_packages - Remove the 'fc9' in the changelog entry '...com> - 0.78-1' https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs - %{?_smp_mflags} and %{optflags} are not honored in the %build section -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review