https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1065539 Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |pbrady@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #3 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to David King from comment #1) > Minor licensing problem to fix, in that because of the lack of > interdependencies (which is fine, based on your reasoning) the license is > not necessarily installed when one of the binding packages is installed (at > least the -filters, -perl and -shell packages seem to be affected, but you > can examine the generated Requires below for more details). I would suggest > adding the appropriate license to %doc for each of the subpackages. Good catch. I have added the licenses. > As you have mentioned that this package will replace the existing > python-subunit package, would it be useful to add Obsoletes/Provides as per > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming. > 2FReplacing_Existing_Packages ? No, the name of the binary package will not change. It's just being built from a different source RPM. All that is necessary is for the NEVR to be higher on the new package than on the old. When I first submitted this for review, python-subunit was on 0.0.12, so it wasn't a problem. It has been updated to 0.0.18-1 now, so the new package must be at least 0.0.18-2, and there should not be any more builds of python-subunit. I am adding the python-subunit maintainers to the CC list for this bug to try to prevent that. > > The Perl packaging guidelines seem to require a particular style of > Requires, so I suppose that should be added to the -perl subpackage: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Perl#Perl_Requires_and_Provides > > Where chmod is used to change permissions, it updates the timestamp too, so > you should try to preserve timestamps (maybe with "touch -r", although there > might be a better way). > > Package Review > ============== > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > [ ] = Manual review needed > > > ===== MUST items ===== > > C/C++: > [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. > [x]: Package contains no static executables. > [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. > [x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. > [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) > [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. > [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. > > 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: > "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 37 files have unknown > license. Detailed output of licensecheck in > /home/david/checkout/rpms/1065539-subunit/licensecheck.txt > > GPLv2 is bogus, as it is the license of the libtool script, so this is fine. > > [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. > [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must > be documented in the spec. > [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/profile.d > > Should be fine, owned by setup package. > > [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. > [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. > [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. > [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. > [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. > [x]: 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). > [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. > [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 92160 bytes in 8 files. > [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines > [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 requires other packages for directories it uses. > [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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. > [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. > [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]: No %config files under /usr. > [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 > > Perl: > [ ]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires and Requires:. > Note: Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`"; > echo > $version)) missing? > > Python: > [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. > [ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should > provide egg info. > [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python > [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel > [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep > > ===== 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. > [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). > [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in subunit- > cppunit-devel , subunit-perl , subunit-shell , python-subunit , subunit- > filters > [ ]: Package functions as described. > [x]: Latest version is packaged. > [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. > [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. > [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. > [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains > translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. > [-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. > [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. > [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. > [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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. > [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. > [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: subunit-0.0.18-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm > subunit-devel-0.0.18-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm > subunit-cppunit-0.0.18-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm > subunit-cppunit-devel-0.0.18-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm > subunit-perl-0.0.18-1.fc21.noarch.rpm > subunit-shell-0.0.18-1.fc21.noarch.rpm > python-subunit-0.0.18-1.fc21.noarch.rpm > subunit-filters-0.0.18-1.fc21.noarch.rpm > subunit-0.0.18-1.fc21.src.rpm > subunit.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C subunit > subunit-cppunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation > subunit-cppunit-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/share/doc/subunit-cppunit-devel/README > subunit-perl.noarch: W: no-documentation > subunit-perl.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-diff > python-subunit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xUnit -> x > Unit, unit > python-subunit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US > deserialization -> serialization, materialization, denationalization > python-subunit.noarch: W: no-documentation > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-documentation > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2gtk > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-tags > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tap2subunit > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2junitxml > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-2to1 > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-output > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-1to2 > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-filter > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2pyunit > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-notify > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2csv > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-ls > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-stats > subunit.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C subunit > 9 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 22 warnings. > > > > > Rpmlint (installed packages) > ---------------------------- > # rpmlint python-subunit subunit-shell subunit-perl subunit-d > evel subunit-cppunit subunit-cppunit-devel subunit-filters subunit > python-subunit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xUnit -> x > Unit, unit > python-subunit.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US > deserialization -> serialization, materialization, denationalization > python-subunit.noarch: W: no-documentation > subunit-perl.noarch: W: no-documentation > subunit-perl.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-diff > subunit-cppunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation > subunit-cppunit-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address > /usr/share/doc/subunit-cppunit-devel/README > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-documentation > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2gtk > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-tags > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tap2subunit > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2junitxml > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-2to1 > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-output > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-1to2 > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-filter > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2pyunit > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-notify > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit2csv > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-ls > subunit-filters.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subunit-stats > subunit.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C subunit > 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 21 warnings. > # echo 'rpmlint-done:' > > > > Requires > -------- > python-subunit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /usr/bin/python > python(abi) > python-extras > python-iso8601 > python-testtools > > subunit-shell (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > config(subunit-shell) > > subunit-perl (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /usr/bin/perl > perl(Exporter) > perl(FindBin) > perl(Getopt::Long) > perl(POSIX) > perl(Subunit) > perl(Subunit::Diff) > perl(lib) > perl(strict) > perl(vars) > > subunit-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /usr/bin/pkg-config > libsubunit.so.0()(64bit) > subunit(x86-64) > > subunit-cppunit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /sbin/ldconfig > libc.so.6()(64bit) > libcppunit-1.12.so.1()(64bit) > libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) > libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) > libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) > libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) > libsubunit.so.0()(64bit) > rtld(GNU_HASH) > subunit(x86-64) > > subunit-cppunit-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /usr/bin/pkg-config > cppunit-devel(x86-64) > libcppunit_subunit.so.0()(64bit) > subunit-cppunit(x86-64) > subunit-devel(x86-64) > > subunit-filters (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /usr/bin/python > pygtk2 > python-subunit > > subunit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /sbin/ldconfig > libc.so.6()(64bit) > rtld(GNU_HASH) > > > > Provides > -------- > python-subunit: > python-subunit > > subunit-shell: > config(subunit-shell) > subunit-shell > > subunit-perl: > perl(Subunit) > perl(Subunit::Diff) > subunit-perl > > subunit-devel: > pkgconfig(libsubunit) > subunit-devel > subunit-devel(x86-64) > > subunit-cppunit: > libcppunit_subunit.so.0()(64bit) > subunit-cppunit > subunit-cppunit(x86-64) > > subunit-cppunit-devel: > pkgconfig(libcppunit_subunit) > subunit-cppunit-devel > subunit-cppunit-devel(x86-64) > > subunit-filters: > subunit-filters > > subunit: > libsubunit.so.0()(64bit) > subunit > subunit(x86-64) > > > > Source checksums > ---------------- > https://launchpad.net/subunit/trunk/0.0.18/+download/subunit-0.0.18.tar.gz : > CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : > f4508a83b1206a85f6c1cfc57f83edc2ca13d62cc65be90ec27eadfa792a6eb4 > CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : > f4508a83b1206a85f6c1cfc57f83edc2ca13d62cc65be90ec27eadfa792a6eb4 > > > Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 > Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1065539 > Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 > Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api, C/C++, Perl > Disabled plugins: Java, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby > Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG -- 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review