https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1001008 --- Comment #10 from Daniel Berrange <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 1269760 bytes in 4 files. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation This is due to the /usr/share/doc/CImg-devel/CImg_reference.pdf file. I think it is reasonable to leave that as part of the main -devel RPM, and not move it to -doc. 1 MB is still small compared to the overall size of the toolchain required to use CImg. ===== 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]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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]: 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. While most files are CeCILL licensed as per the spec, the file /usr/include/CImg/plugins/cimgmatlab.h is LGPL licensed - no mention of which version though. [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. Missing mention of LGPL [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Doesn't own the dir /usr/include/CImg [-]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. Doesn't honour compiler flags, but only things compiled are examples used as part of %check, which are not distributed, so can ignore this. [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. [-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [c]: 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. [!]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Incorrect Source0 URL [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]: 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]: 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. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [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. [-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [!]: 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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Rpmlint ------- Checking: CImg-devel-1.5.8-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm CImg-1.5.8-1.fc20.src.rpm CImg-devel.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/CImg-devel/Licence_CeCILL_V2-en.txt CImg-devel.x86_64: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/CImg-devel/Licence_CeCILL-C_V1-en.txt CImg.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US developping -> developing, develop ping, develop-ping CImg.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/CImg/CImg-1.5.8.zip HTTP Error 302: The HTTP server returned a redirect error that would lead to an infinite loop. The last 30x error message was: Found 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. The RPM lint warning about Source0 is correct, the URL prefix should be '/project/cimg/' not '/project/CImg/' - in the .spec change '/project/%{name}/' to '/project/cimg/' So in summary - Fix Source0 URL - Fix license to include LGPL - Change %{_includedir}/%{name}/plugins to %{_includedir}/%{name} in %files -- 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