https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1131284 Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kalevlember@xxxxxxxxx Flags| |needinfo?(kalevlember@gmail | |.com) --- Comment #8 from Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro@xxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. I think the license field should be: BSD and BSD with advertising and ISC and LGPLv2 and LGPLv2+ and MIT and (MPLv1.1 or GPLv2+ or LGPLv2+) [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. The guidelines say that you need to do this, but that does not look fun or reasonable. Maybe just a comment to say "it's complicated" would be OK? [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. We should probably apply for an exception for ANGLE, but let's not block on on that since we've already been bundling it for ages. [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in webkitgtk4-devel. [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. Note: Looks like the timestamps of when the RPM was built. Optional. We should probably inform upstream about the shared-lib-calls-exit and unused-direct-shlib-dependency rpmlint warnings. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [!]: 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]: The spec file handles locales properly. [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. [x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. Note: Will obsolete libwebkit2gtk3, as mentioned in comment #0. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. Note: Don't even think about trying this. :) [!]: 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: [-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 3420160 bytes in /usr/share. Looks like it's all locales. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: webkitgtk4-2.5.3-2.fc22.x86_64.rpm webkitgtk4-devel-2.5.3-2.fc22.x86_64.rpm webkitgtk4-2.5.3-2.fc22.src.rpm webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so.18.0.2 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 _exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: no-documentation webkitgtk4-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib webkitgtk4-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation webkitgtk4-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jsc 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint webkitgtk4 webkitgtk4-devel webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so.18.0.2 /lib64/libz.so.1 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so.18.0.2 /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so.18.0.2 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 /lib64/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 /lib64/libcairo-gobject.so.2 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 /lib64/libXrender.so.1 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 /lib64/libXt.so.6 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37.1.1 _exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 webkitgtk4.x86_64: W: no-documentation webkitgtk4-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib webkitgtk4-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation webkitgtk4-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jsc 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 13 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- webkitgtk4 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig geoclue2 ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libEGL.so.1()(64bit) libGL.so.1()(64bit) libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXcomposite.so.1()(64bit) libXdamage.so.1()(64bit) libXrender.so.1()(64bit) libXt.so.6()(64bit) libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcairo-gobject.so.2()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libenchant.so.1()(64bit) libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.0.0)(64bit) libgdk-3.so.0()(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstapp-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstaudio-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstbase-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstfft-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstpbutils-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstreamer-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgsttag-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstvideo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-3.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libharfbuzz-icu.so.0()(64bit) libharfbuzz.so.0()(64bit) libicui18n.so.52()(64bit) libicuuc.so.52()(64bit) libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so.18()(64bit) libjpeg.so.62()(64bit) libjpeg.so.62(LIBJPEG_6.2)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpng16.so.16()(64bit) libpng16.so.16(PNG16_0)(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libsecret-1.so.0()(64bit) libsoup-2.4.so.1()(64bit) libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37()(64bit) libwebp.so.5()(64bit) libxml2.so.2()(64bit) libxml2.so.2(LIBXML2_2.4.30)(64bit) libxml2.so.2(LIBXML2_2.6.0)(64bit) libxml2.so.2(LIBXML2_2.6.6)(64bit) libxslt.so.1()(64bit) libxslt.so.1(LIBXML2_1.0.11)(64bit) libxslt.so.1(LIBXML2_1.0.22)(64bit) libxslt.so.1(LIBXML2_1.0.24)(64bit) libxslt.so.1(LIBXML2_1.1.9)(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.0)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) webkitgtk4-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config libc.so.6()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libicui18n.so.52()(64bit) libicuuc.so.52()(64bit) libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so.18()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) pkgconfig(glib-2.0) pkgconfig(gtk+-3.0) pkgconfig(javascriptcoregtk-4.0) pkgconfig(libsoup-2.4) rtld(GNU_HASH) webkitgtk4(x86-64) Provides -------- webkitgtk4: libjavascriptcoregtk-4.0.so.18()(64bit) libwebkit2gtk-4.0.so.37()(64bit) libwebkit2gtkinjectedbundle.so()(64bit) webkitgtk4 webkitgtk4(x86-64) webkitgtk4-devel: pkgconfig(javascriptcoregtk-4.0) pkgconfig(webkit2gtk-4.0) pkgconfig(webkit2gtk-web-extension-4.0) webkitgtk4-devel webkitgtk4-devel(x86-64) Unversioned so-files -------------------- webkitgtk4: /usr/lib64/webkit2gtk-4.0/injected-bundle/libwebkit2gtkinjectedbundle.so Source checksums ---------------- http://webkitgtk.org/releases/webkitgtk-2.5.3.tar.xz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 010803e371ac92a3e0e297e929978f83a9a3c597e4a10d50363fb1aaa6ea18d6 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 010803e371ac92a3e0e297e929978f83a9a3c597e4a10d50363fb1aaa6ea18d6 NEEDSWORK -- 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