https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892335 --- Comment #35 from Björn "besser82" Esser <bjoern.esser@xxxxxxxxx> --- ===== Review report for AudioCuesheetEditor-1.0.3-1 ===== This review report has been made from manually downloaded spec / srpm as announced in comment #28. Package has severe issues. :( Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated Issues ====== - specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Tue Jun 16 2013 Sven Baus <s.baus86@xxxxxxx> 1.0.3-1 Tue Jun 09 2013 Sven Baus <s.baus86@xxxxxxx> 1.0.3-1 Sun Apr 04 2013 Sven Baus <s.baus86@xxxxxxx> 0.3.0-1 ---> please fix those bogus-dates to existing ones, like either changing the day matching the date or vice-versa. - wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding: /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/LICENCE.TXT /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/KNOWN_ISSUES.TXT /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/CHANGELOG.TXT /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/README.TXT ---> please fix this as explained on: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding I'd recommend using this script during %prep, which preserves the original file's timestamp, too: for _file in '*.TXT' do sed -i.orig -e 's!\r$!!g' ${_file} && \ touch -r ${_file}.orig ${_file} && \ rm -rf ${_file}.orig done ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/besser82/shared/fedora/review/review- AudioCuesheetEditor/licensecheck.txt ---> License-tag is fine. :) [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/AudioCuesheetEditor ---> dir is created by the package itself, but not owned as explained below. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/AudioCuesheetEditor ---> remove the '/*' from `/usr/lib/%{name}/*` in %files. This will make the rpm own `/usr/lib/%{name}` with all it's contents. [!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. ---> compiler-flags don't get exported properly. Add `%configure ||:` at the very beginning of %build. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [!]: Changelog in prescribed format. ---> bogus-dates are present. as explained above. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). ---> hardcoding `/usr/lib/` is intentional on Mono / C# based packages, as explained by the Mono-guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Mono#File_Locations [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [!]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. ---> debuginfo-pkg is empty, because you strip the exec-perms from the build binary. make sure the binary keeps it's exec-perms, please, so rpmbuild's debuginfo automagic will properly find and extract all debugging symbols from build. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 4 files. [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines ---> severe issues are present. [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: 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 %doc. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). ---> explicit `Requires: gtk-sharp2,mono-core` is not need at all. those dependencies are picked up by AutoRequires. [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. ---> no testsuite present. [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. ---> timestamps on resources/* are not preserved. I'd recommend using `cp -a` instead of `cp -R` [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: AudioCuesheetEditor-1.0.3-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm AudioCuesheetEditor-1.0.3-1.fc21.src.rpm AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cuesheet -> cue sheet, cue-sheet, dustsheet AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cuesheet -> cue sheet, cue-sheet, dustsheet AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gui -> GUI, goo, gun AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: E: no-binary AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/LICENCE.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/KNOWN_ISSUES.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/CHANGELOG.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/README.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary AudioCuesheetEditor AudioCuesheetEditor.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cuesheet -> cue sheet, cue-sheet, dustsheet AudioCuesheetEditor.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cuesheet -> cue sheet, cue-sheet, dustsheet AudioCuesheetEditor.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gui -> GUI, goo, gun AudioCuesheetEditor.src:25: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib/%{name} AudioCuesheetEditor.src:28: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib/%{name}/resources AudioCuesheetEditor.src:29: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib/%{name}/%{name}.exe AudioCuesheetEditor.src:46: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/%{name}/* AudioCuesheetEditor.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Tue Jun 16 2013 Sven Baus <s.baus86@xxxxxxx> 1.0.3-1 AudioCuesheetEditor.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Tue Jun 09 2013 Sven Baus <s.baus86@xxxxxxx> 1.0.3-1 AudioCuesheetEditor.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Sun Apr 04 2013 Sven Baus <s.baus86@xxxxxxx> 0.3.0-1 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 12 warnings. ---> 'hardcoded-library-path' is intentional on Mono / C# based packages as explained by Mono-guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Mono#File_Locations 'wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding' and 'specfile-error warning: bogus date' is as explained within `Issues`. Please fix spelling: cuesheet -> cue-sheet / gui -> GUI The rest of those messages can be safely ignored. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint AudioCuesheetEditor AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cuesheet -> cue sheet, cue-sheet, dustsheet AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cuesheet -> cue sheet, cue-sheet, dustsheet AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gui -> GUI, goo, gun AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: E: no-binary AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/LICENCE.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/KNOWN_ISSUES.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/CHANGELOG.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/AudioCuesheetEditor/README.TXT AudioCuesheetEditor.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary AudioCuesheetEditor 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 9 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' ---> As written above. Requires -------- AudioCuesheetEditor (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh gtk-sharp2 mono(System) mono(System.Xml) mono(gdk-sharp) mono(glib-sharp) mono(gtk-sharp) mono(mscorlib) mono-core Provides -------- AudioCuesheetEditor: AudioCuesheetEditor AudioCuesheetEditor(x86-64) application() application(AudioCuesheetEditor.desktop) mono(AudioCuesheetEditor) Source checksums ---------------- http://downloads.sourceforge.net/audiocuesheet/AudioCuesheetEditor-src-v1.0.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : cc9d5a221e583fecea43f327294f02f77a9764dd6bd7955253f0a8baf28028e3 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : cc9d5a221e583fecea43f327294f02f77a9764dd6bd7955253f0a8baf28028e3 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.0 (920221d) last change: 2013-08-30 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -n AudioCuesheetEditor Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, SugarActivity, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EPEL5, EXARCH, DISTTAG ===== Additional comments ===== - BuildRequires: gtk-sharp2-devel,mono-devel,desktop-file-utils ---> It usually improves the readability of a spec-file to have the BRs split into one per line and ordered by alphabet. BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils BuildRequires: gtk-sharp2-devel BuildRequires: mono-devel - Summary is somehow useless. ---> I'd change it to: `Write audio cuesheets fast and efficient` - LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 xbuild ---> Builds usually shouldn't use any locale different from "C". If you really need some UTF-8 encoding during build, you should use `us_US.UTF-8` instead. - The description of the package is is somehow a bit to unexplainive. ---> Some better description would be: Annoyed of writing your audio cuesheets via text editor? Here comes the solution! Audio Cuesheet Editor helps you editing your audio cuesheet file. With Audio Cuesheet Editor you can import textfiles, edit the imported data and afterwards export to a working audio cuesheet. Features * Import Textfiles (Scheme can be changed in Options) * Import existing cuesheets * Edit Imported Data * Edit Cuesheet in GUI * Several logical test (starttime < endtime,etc) with warning for users * Export as Cuesheet * Export profiles can be configured (*.csv,*.txt, etc.) * Several Options * Automatic Update recognition * Drag & Drop That would -- from my pov -- give a lot more information and idea about what you can do with the app. - chmod a-x *.TXT bin/Release/resources/*.xml ... in %build ---> I'd move that to %prep and use a modified version: find . -depth -type f -print0 | xargs -0 chmod 0644 - You can drop the use of `%{_builddir}/%{name}-src-v%{version}/` in %install, because rpmbuild always makes sure you are in toplevel of the sources. ===== Solution ===== NOT APPROVED -- Please fix the present issues and think about my additional comments. I'll run another review on the updated packages. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review