https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235085
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|needinfo?(zebob.m(a)gmail.com |needinfo?(loganjerry@gmail.
|) |com)
--- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> ---
- In any case, the license in __init__.py, the only file that seems
to matter,
is BSD-2-Clause, not BSD-3-Clause.
ok
- Upstream packs a bunch of license files into the dist-info. Since
only the
bsd-simplified.LICENSE file is relevant, is it worth the effort to prevent
the other license files from being installed? Note that public-domain.LICENSE
is empty, so we probably don't want it in any case.
patched out:
Patch: remove-unused-licenses.patch
- The README.rst file is installed in both the dist-info directory
(with the
executable bits stripped off) and in /usr/share/doc (with the executable bits
still on). We probably don't need it in both places. If you choose to have
it in /usr/share/doc, please remove the executable bits.
Removed from %doc
- This package does not have an ExcludeArch tag. The code in
__init__.py only
looks for libmagic.so in /usr/lib64, which will fail on 32-bit x86.
I already part of this, let's patch the rest:
https://github.com/nexB/scancode-plugins/pull/34
Thanks for the review.
Spec URL:
https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-typecode-libmagic.spec
SRPM URL:
https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-typecode-libmagic-21....
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235085
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...