https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2229170 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar <ppisar@xxxxxxxxxx> --- URL and Source0 addresses are Ok. Source0 archive (SHA-512: 9771c697515f5232eaeaff79e68fe15e34d8aa38aa5d3d68525216357223f314c544d71b5fe18d79a77682f41b1b5d9fb5e7c3c99d0cba5723d2e3de31faec96) is original. Ok. Summary verified from README. Ok. Description verified from README. Ok. Found licenses: aclocal.m4: FSFULLRWD AND FSFULLR AND GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Libtool-exception AND FSFUL config.guess: GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Autoconf-exception-generic config.sub: GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Autoconf-exception-generic configure: FSFUL AND GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Libtool-exception COPYING.LIB: LGPL-2.1 text depcomp: GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Autoconf-exception-generic install: X11 AND LicenseRef-Fedora-Public-Domain INSTALL: FSFULLR-like ltmain.sh: GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Libtool-exception Makefile.in: FSFULLRWD missing: GPL-2.0-or-later WITH Autoconf-exception-generic pkgconfig/Makefile.in: FSFULLRWD README: LGPL README.LICENSE: "Relicensed to LGPL" src/asfheader.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/bswap.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/Makefile.in: FSFULLRWD src/mms-common.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/mms-common-funcs.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/mms.c: LGPL-2-or-later src/mms.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/mmsx.c: LGPL-2-or-later src/mmsh.c: LGPL-2-or-later src/mmsh.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/mmsio.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/mmsx.h: LPGL-2-or-later src/uri.c: LGPL-2-or-later src/uri.h: LGPL-2-or-later src/utf.c: LPGL-2-or-later src/utf.h: LPGL-2-or-later 0002-Add-a-new-testfiledownload.c-example.patch: LGPL-2-or-later 0003-Fix-build-if-strndup-is-missing.patch: Unknown license! FIX: Use "LGPL-2.1-or-later" in the License tag to match what is in COPYING.LIB file. FIX: Find where 0003-Fix-build-if-strndup-is-missing.patch comes from. Now it's a piece of code without a license, hence Fedora cannot distribute it. I guess it comes from an old gcc/libiberty. FIX: Build-require "coreutils" (libmms.spec:38). FIX: Build-require "bash" (autogen.sh:1). FIX: Build-require "autoconf" (autogen.sh:2). FIX: Build-require "automake" (configure.in:3). NEWS file is empty. Not packaged. Ok. No upstream tests, no %check section. Ok. Distribution compiler and linker flags are respected. Ok. $ rpmlint libmms.spec ../SRPMS/libmms-0.6.4-22.fc40.src.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-* ======================================== rpmlint session starts ======================================= rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 6 libmms.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/libmms/COPYING.LIB libmms-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/libmms/mms.h libmms-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/libmms/mmsh.h libmms-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/libmms/mmsio.h libmms-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/libmms/mmsx.h ========= 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 warnings, 5 badness; has taken 0.4 s ======== rpmlint is Ok. TODO: Ask upstream to updated FSF address at <https://sourceforge.net/p/libmms/bugs/>. TODO: Link 0005-Avoid-possible-overflow-in-sprintf.patch to <https://sourceforge.net/p/libmms/bugs/23/> and share the patch there. TODO: Link 0006-Fix-possible-NULL-Pointer-deref-in-mmsh.c.patch to <https://sourceforge.net/p/libmms/bugs/18/>. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-0.6.4-22.fc40.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/97 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 37 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/97/6ca36b69649329389f177457a7997a9ff7686e -> ../../../../usr/lib64/libmms.so.0.0.2 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/lib64/libmms.so.0 -> libmms.so.0.0.2 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 73816 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/lib64/libmms.so.0.0.2 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/share/doc/libmms -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 291 Mar 28 2014 /usr/share/doc/libmms/AUTHORS -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 16108 Apr 9 2014 /usr/share/doc/libmms/ChangeLog -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2273 Mar 28 2014 /usr/share/doc/libmms/README -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 264 Mar 28 2014 /usr/share/doc/libmms/README.LICENSE drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/share/licenses/libmms -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 26528 Mar 28 2014 /usr/share/licenses/libmms/COPYING.LIB $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-devel-0.6.4-22.fc40.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/include/libmms -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3009 Mar 28 2014 /usr/include/libmms/mms.h -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 221 Apr 9 2014 /usr/include/libmms/mms_config.h -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2224 Mar 28 2014 /usr/include/libmms/mmsh.h -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3758 Mar 28 2014 /usr/include/libmms/mmsio.h -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2316 Mar 28 2014 /usr/include/libmms/mmsx.h lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/lib64/libmms.so -> libmms.so.0.0.2 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 204 Aug 4 02:00 /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/libmms.pc File layout and permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-0.6.4-22.fc40.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libc.so.6()(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.15)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.7)(64bit) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 1 rtld(GNU_HASH) $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-devel-0.6.4-22.fc40.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 /usr/bin/pkg-config 1 libmms(x86-64) = 0.6.4-22.fc40 1 libmms.so.0()(64bit) 1 pkgconfig 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 FIX: Run-require "pkgconf-pkg-config" instead of "pkgconfig". /usr/lib64/pkgconfig is owned by pkgconf-pkg-config. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-0.6.4-22.fc40.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libmms = 0.6.4-22.fc40 1 libmms(x86-64) = 0.6.4-22.fc40 1 libmms.so.0()(64bit) $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-devel-0.6.4-22.fc40.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libmms-devel = 0.6.4-22.fc40 1 libmms-devel(x86-64) = 0.6.4-22.fc40 1 pkgconfig(libmms) = 0.6.4 Binary provides are Ok. $ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/x86_64/libmms-{,devel-}0.6.4-22.fc40.x86_64.rpm Binary dependencies are resolvable. Ok. The package builds in Fedora 40 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=104639563). Ok. Otherwise, the package is in line with Fedora packaging guidelines. Please correct the "FIX" items, consider fixing "TODO" items, and provide a new spec file. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2229170 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202229170%23c2 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
