https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1330316 --- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo <puntogil@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #10) > 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 Sorry, the license field is correct use ASL 2.0 and MIT Remains to resolve the problems reported above ( Comment#10 ) -- 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