[Bug 533803] Review Request: libcue - CUE sheet parser library

bugzilla at redhat.com bugzilla at redhat.com
Sat Nov 14 09:19:06 UTC 2009


Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533803


Michael Schwendt <mschwendt at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |mschwendt at gmail.com
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |mschwendt at gmail.com
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




--- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt at gmail.com>  2009-11-14 04:19:05 EDT ---
* "Group" tag of base package should be: System Environment/Libraries


* Source URL points at a web page instead of the source tarball. Use this (it
follows the guidelines, too):
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/libcue/libcue-%{version}.tar.bz2


> %description
> Libcue is intended to parse a so called [...]

Correct English IMO would be:  Libcue is intended for parsing a so-called [...]


> W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libcue.so.1.0.3 exit at GLIBC_2.0

Not good, since this is a library. Libraries ought to return error values
instead of terminating the process. This exit call is in a fatal error function
inside the generated flex scanner code.


* Two source files rem.c and rem.h contain a BSD license header and the name of
the current developer. According to Fedora's Licensing Guidelines, this must be
reflected in the "License" tag plus a comment in the spec file:

  # Files libcue/rem.{c,h} contain a BSD header
  License: GPLv2 and BSD

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios

The project's file "COPYING" comments on the two licences and explicitly
acknowledges that the whole libcue project uses the GPLv2. Preferably, the
current developer removes the ambiguity and explicitly applies the GPLv2 inside
the rem.c/rem.h files, too.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.




More information about the Fedora-package-review mailing list