============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.7.0
configuration:
    /opt/testing/lib64/python3.13/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/cron-whitelist.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/dbus-services.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/device-files-whitelist.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/licenses.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/opensuse.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/pam-modules.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/permissions-whitelist.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/pie-executables.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/polkit-rules-whitelist.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/security.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/sudoers-whitelist.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/sysctl-whitelist.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/systemd-tmpfiles.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/world-writable-whitelist.toml
    /opt/testing/share/rpmlint/zypper-plugins.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring-strict.override.toml
checks: 41, packages: 3

libmfx1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libmfx_vp8d_hw64.so
libmfx1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libmfx_hevcd_hw64.so
libmfx1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libmfx_hevc_fei_hw64.so
libmfx1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libmfx_vp9d_hw64.so
libmfx1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libmfx_hevce_hw64.so
libmfx1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libmfx_vp9e_hw64.so
libmfx1.x86_64: W: shlib-unversioned-lib libmfx_h264la_hw64.so
Your package matches the Shared Library Policy Naming Scheme but contains an
unversioned library. Therefore it is very unlikely that your package can be
installed in parallel to another version of this library package. Consider
moving unversioned parts into another package.

libmfx.x86_64: E: no-binary
The package should be of the noarch architecture because it doesn't contain
any binaries.

libmfx.spec: W: no-%check-section
The spec file does not contain an %check section. Please check if the package
has a testsuite and what it takes to enable the testsuite as part of the
package build. If it is not possible to run it in the build environment
(OBS/koji) or no testsuite exists, then please ignore this warning. You should
not insert an empty %check section.

libmfx.spec:108: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
libmfx.spec:108: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir}
libmfx.spec:109: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
libmfx.spec:109: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir}
libmfx.spec:110: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
libmfx.spec:110: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir}
libmfx.spec:111: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
libmfx.spec:111: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir}
libmfx.spec:136: W: macro-in-comment %files
libmfx.spec:139: W: macro-in-comment %files
There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros
are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and
escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate.

Check time report (>1% & >0.1s):
    Check                            Duration (in s)   Fraction (in %)  Checked files
    ExtractRpm                                   2.2              87.3               
    SignatureCheck                               0.1               4.3               
    TOTAL                                        2.5             100.0               

 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 18 warnings, 7 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 2.5 s