https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1330316 --- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo <puntogil@xxxxxxxxx> --- Issues: [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 268 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1330316-bitcoinj/licensecheck.txt This file is under BSD license bitcoinj-0.14.3/core/src/main/java/org/bitcoinj/crypto/PBKDF2SHA512.java and License field should be: ASL 2.0 and BSD and MIT [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. Please, add an comment/s [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. Please, add an comment/s -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx