https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1827887
--- Comment #4 from greg.helli...@gmail.com --- >- If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) > in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) > for the package is included in %license. > Note: License file COPYING is not marked as %license > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- > guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text >^ >Please use the %license macro for the LICENSE files. Fixed this. >- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if > present. > Note: Package has .a files: mingw32-biblesync, mingw64-biblesync. Illegal > package name: mingw32-biblesync, mingw64-biblesync. Does not provide > -static: mingw32-biblesync, mingw64-biblesync. > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- > guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries > >^ The *.dll.a files aren't static libraries, so I think this is a false >positive. Please double check this. (There aren't any static libraries in the >package at all.) Yeah, a .dll.a file is a specific thing to MinGW. In some ways it's a static library, but it's the stub another .dll or a .exe needs to link to that knows how to locate and call the .dll. Real static libraries in MinGW end in just .a. I'm not generating them for Biblesync. Thanks for the review! -- 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@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
