https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2259867



--- Comment #4 from Fabio Valentini <[email protected]> ---
Thank you for the review!

===

> Issues:
> =======
> - Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
>   Note: warning: File listed twice:
>   /usr/share/cargo/registry/askama_parser-0.2.1/LICENSE-APACHE
>   See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
>   guidelines/#_duplicate_files
> 
>   This is not a serious problem; if it needs to be fixed, it should be done
>       in rust2rpm.

This is caused by %crate_instdir/LICENSE-APACHE being marked as %license, while
%crate_instdir is also owned by the package. It does not cause cause the file
to be included twice, only that it is marked as %license. So the warning is
harmless (RPM upstream devs confirmed this).

Before we switched from relative to absolute paths for %license / %doc files in
rust2rpm, they were *actually* included twice in the file (once in
%crate_instdir, once under /usr/share/{licenses,doc}/%{name}). Using absolute
paths introduced a harmless RPM warning ("File listed twice"), but made
packages smaller and dropped one rpmlint error ("duplicate files"). We cannot
(easily) make both RPM and rpmlint be happy without warnings here, I think :)


-- 
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=2259867

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202259867%23c4
--
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
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/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to