Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=890733 --- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann <mario.blaettermann@xxxxxxxxx> --- Scratch build for Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4833622 $ rpmlint -i -v * mkproject.src: I: checking mkproject.src: I: checking-url http://code.google.com/p/makeproject (timeout 10 seconds) mkproject.src:63: W: macro-in-%changelog %files Macros are expanded in %changelog too, which can in unfortunate cases lead to the package not building at all, or other subtle unexpected conditions that affect the build. Even when that doesn't happen, the expansion results in possibly "rewriting history" on subsequent package revisions and generally odd entries eg. in source rpms, which is rarely wanted. Avoid use of macros in %changelog altogether, or use two '%'s to escape them, like '%%foo'. mkproject.src: I: checking-url http://makeproject.googlecode.com/files/mkproject-0.4.6.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) mkproject.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://makeproject.googlecode.com/files/mkproject-0.4.6.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. mkproject.noarch: I: checking mkproject.noarch: I: checking-url http://code.google.com/p/makeproject (timeout 10 seconds) mkproject.spec:63: W: macro-in-%changelog %files Macros are expanded in %changelog too, which can in unfortunate cases lead to the package not building at all, or other subtle unexpected conditions that affect the build. Even when that doesn't happen, the expansion results in possibly "rewriting history" on subsequent package revisions and generally odd entries eg. in source rpms, which is rarely wanted. Avoid use of macros in %changelog altogether, or use two '%'s to escape them, like '%%foo'. mkproject.spec: I: checking-url http://makeproject.googlecode.com/files/mkproject-0.4.6.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) mkproject.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://makeproject.googlecode.com/files/mkproject-0.4.6.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. --- The download URL is valid, the tarball is downloadable. That's a common problem with Googlecode stuff. The issue about the macro in a comment is rather cosmetic, but you should escape it with an extra "%" to make rpmlint happy again. mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/%{name} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} The command to move the doc files is superfluous. Just write (in %files): %doc AUTHORS COPYING Changelog NEWS README The %doc macro creates the appropriate folder and copies the files, that's all. [mariobl@localhost src]$ licensecheck -r * cmd.sh: GPL (v3 or later) mkproject.in.sh: GPL (v3 or later) mps.sh: GPL (v3 or later) skeletons/c-lib.sh: GPL (v3 or later) skeletons/bash.sh: GPL (v3 or later) skeletons/perl.sh: GPL (v3 or later) skeletons/c.sh: GPL (v3 or later) skeletons/c++-lib.sh: GPL (v3 or later) skeletons/c++.sh: GPL (v3 or later) skeletons/python.sh: GPL (v3 or later) Well, all source files seem to be GPLv3+ licensed. But I see also a TeXinfo version of the GFDL (fdl.texi) in the doc folder. Is there anything GFDL licensed? $ rpm -qpR *noarch.rpm /bin/sh /bin/sh /usr/bin/env autoconf bash coreutils info info rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 sed util-linux rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 As far as I can see, you can safely drop "bash" from the runtime requirements. It is automatically detected by rpm. I assume that /bin/sh match the needs of "bash". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=r4U2DIEp8f&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review