https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1684524 Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(jpazdziora@redhat | |.com) | --- Comment #2 from Jan Pazdziora <jpazdziora@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Stephen Gallagher from comment #1) > tl;dr: Minor issues, see the "Issues" section below. > > > Package Review > ============== > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > [ ] = Manual review needed > > > Issues: > ======= > - The package has `Requires: fedora-release-common` which means that it > cannot be installed on a Fedora Remix. This should be > `Requires: system-release` The primary reason for the Requires: fedora-release-common is to pull in a package which owns /etc/swid, to which we put the swidq.conf config file. Currently, # rpm -qf /etc/swid fedora-release-common-30-0.24.noarch How does the same work on Fedora Remix? > - The dnf-plugin-swidtags subpackage has an unversioned `Requires: > swid-tools` > This should be `Requires: swid-tools = %{version}-%{release}` to ensure > they > are always updated together. > - Use %global upstream_name, not %define Will fix these, thanks. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
