[Bug 2190] Review request: AtomicParsley - Command-Line Program to Read and Set iTunes-style Metadata Tags
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2190
--- Comment #4 from Alec Leamas <leamas.alec(a)gmail.com> 2012-03-05 11:51:16 CET ---
Since it seems clear from comment #2 that this could (and thus should) be
submitted to main fedora, I suggest that you close this bug and issue a new
request to bugzilla.redhat.com. However, since we started a kind a review here
I enclose some comments.
Cheers,
alec
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #1)
[cut]
> The License: tag does not reflect the fact that some code is
MIT/X11
> licensed. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Licensing.
Couldn't find a nothing on the source that says MIT/X11 license.
In the package rpmdev-tools there's a tool called licensecheck. If you apply it
to the source it will reveal that some files related to iconv are MIT/X11
It will also reveal that some source files have the wrong fsf address. You
should inform upstream about this. If you want, you can patch it as well.
> You can't add COPYING yourself, you must contact upstream
about that. And
> upstream has already a COPYING in place. Are you replacing it? This is not
> possible either for legal reasons. After all, it's their code. If you have
> problem with the fsf-address lint warning, just report to upstream, bring the
> link (e. g., bugtracker ticket) in here and live with the warning.
This is old code, there is no upstream. GNU office has moved to another address
but the license file included reflects the old address and rpmlint is
complaining. I'm just overwriting with the new file because of this small
problem.
There's definitely an upstream at sourceforge where you can report.
We can just agree on that we disagree. However, I would not appprove anything
like this, and I doubt anyone else will. I'm sorry not to have an authorative
link on this (it really should be in "Common rpmlint issues"!), but a simple
google search for the rpmlint warning will show you how this is handled.
> Rpmlint shows empty debug package. Probably related to that you
remove the -g
> option to g++. You should not do that, generate debug info and let rpmbuild
> strip to the debug package instead. And run rpmlint on the debug package as
> well.
I can't generate debug packages. How to do that? I even removed the '-s'
(strip) from 'install' but no debug package is generated.
rpmbuild --rebuild <srpm> and rpmbuild -ba <specfile> should both generates
debug packages as long as you don't have anything strange in your rpm setup
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.