https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1122777 Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(puiterwijk@redhat | |.com) | --- Comment #4 from Patrick Uiterwijk <puiterwijk@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/puiterwijk/Documents/Development/Fedora/Review/1122777-tcpcrypt/diff.txt See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL - Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. - Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Note: AC_PROG_LIBTOOL found in: tcpcrypt-cacd9789/user/configure.ac:51 - Rpmlint is run Note: you have some unused linked dependencies, check rpmlint output. Note2: Check here for info on this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#unused-direct-shlib-dependency ===== 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required [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. [x]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 4 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 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]: 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]: 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: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [-]: 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]: 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. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Files in /run, var/run and /var/lock uses tmpfiles.d when appropriate [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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment. See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools [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: tcpcrypt-0-3.cacd9789.fc20.x86_64.rpm tcpcrypt-devel-0-3.cacd9789.fc20.x86_64.rpm tcpcrypt-libs-0-3.cacd9789.fc20.x86_64.rpm tcpcrypt-0-3.cacd9789.fc20.src.rpm tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /run/tcpcryptd tcpcryptd tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /run/tcpcryptd tcpcryptd tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tcpcryptd tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tcnetstat tcpcrypt-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib tcpcrypt-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) tcpcryptd -> cryptic tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tcpcryptd -> cryptic tcpcrypt.src: W: file-size-mismatch tcpcrypt-cacd9789.tar.gz = 177843, https://github.com/scslab/tcpcrypt/archive/cacd9789f29282d8e4ddc018822e6afdb145ab22/tcpcrypt-cacd9789.tar.gz = 177951 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint tcpcrypt-libs tcpcrypt-devel tcpcrypt tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) tcpcryptd -> cryptic tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tcpcryptd -> cryptic tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libtcpcrypt.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libz.so.1 tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libtcpcrypt.so.0.0.0 /lib64/librt.so.1 tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libtcpcrypt.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libnfnetlink.so.0 tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libtcpcrypt.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libnetfilter_queue.so.1 tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libtcpcrypt.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libcrypto.so.10 tcpcrypt-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libtcpcrypt.so.0.0.0 /lib64/libcap.so.2 tcpcrypt-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib tcpcrypt-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /run/tcpcryptd tcpcryptd tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /run/tcpcryptd tcpcryptd tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tcpcryptd tcpcrypt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tcnetstat 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 14 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- tcpcrypt-libs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libcap.so.2()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10()(64bit) libnetfilter_queue.so.1()(64bit) libnfnetlink.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) tcpcrypt-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libtcpcrypt.so.0()(64bit) tcpcrypt(x86-64) tcpcrypt (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh config(tcpcrypt) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcap.so.2()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10(OPENSSL_1.0.1_EC)(64bit) libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10)(64bit) libnetfilter_queue.so.1()(64bit) libnfnetlink.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libtcpcrypt.so.0()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) shadow-utils systemd-units tcpcrypt-libs(x86-64) Provides -------- tcpcrypt-libs: libtcpcrypt.so.0()(64bit) tcpcrypt-libs tcpcrypt-libs(x86-64) tcpcrypt-devel: tcpcrypt-devel tcpcrypt-devel(x86-64) tcpcrypt: config(tcpcrypt) tcpcrypt tcpcrypt(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/scslab/tcpcrypt/archive/cacd9789f29282d8e4ddc018822e6afdb145ab22/tcpcrypt-cacd9789.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 697875062376be17bdfd3523fa2fd37a3fedc6e062622676f76b139910f22e87 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 48f1d4fc57b5ae170a4078032dc8c6aa3ef559af13bacf75d598293ada3ad8f7 diff -r also reports differences AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found ------------------------------ AC_PROG_LIBTOOL found in: tcpcrypt-cacd9789/user/configure.ac:51 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1122777 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, 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