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=799171 --- Comment #2 from Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxx> 2012-03-02 10:49:33 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > PASS MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet > the Licensing Guidelines . > > FAIL MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual > license. [3] > > The spec says > > # Nearly all of openvswitch is ASL 2.0. The bugtool is LGPLv2+, and the > # lib/sflow*.[ch] files are SISSL > License: ASL 2.0 and LGPLv2+ and SISSL > > This is not quite the whole story > > python/compat/uuid.py : PYTHON SOFTWARE FOUNDATION LICENSE VERSION 2 > datapath/linux/compat/flex_array.c: GPLv2+ > datapath/dp_notify.c: GPLv2-only (and more files) Yes, thanks. I had completely put those out of my mind as they are not shpped w/ the binary package. Only in the source. > There are a number of files which have no license header, which upstream > should be encouraged to fix > > I browsed license headers with: > > $ find -name *.c | xargs head -30 | less > $ find -name *.py | xargs head -30 | less I'll push some patches upstream. > FAIL MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16] > > In the %files section there are alot of hardcoded paths, eg /usr/bin, /etc, > /usr/share, etc. Replace these with %{bindir}, %{datadir}, etc > > Also avoid hardcoding '.gz' on the end of man page paths, eg replace > > %{_datadir}/man/man1/ovs-benchmark.1.gz > > with > > %{_datadir}/man/man1/ovs-benchmark.1* For some reason I took that to simply mean consistent use of RPM_BUILD_ROOT vs %{buildroot}. Easy to fix, thanks again. I'll respin and update shortly. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review