https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1159660 Rich Mattes <richmattes@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #5 from Rich Mattes <richmattes@xxxxxxxxx> --- First pass with fedora-review, there are some issues. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Package should contain BR: python2-devel or python3-devel - Package should require python2 or python2 - Package should use __python2 or __python3 macros - attr and defattr aren't typically needed - waagent.conf doensn't have a replace or noreplace with %config - Buildroot not needed for epel 6+ and fedora - Vendor and Packager should be removed - /etc/logrotate.d not owned, OK for this package to own it. - epel7 can use the systemd init, right? ===== 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: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Both are tests, not included in distribution. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/logrotate.d [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: 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]: 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: Test run failed [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local [!]: 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]: 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. Python: [-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep [-]: 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. [!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python %build section should contain setup.py build python versions and macros inconsistent ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [!]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file Note: Found : Packager: Microsoft Corporation <walinuxagent@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Found : Vendor: Microsoft Corporation See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags [!]: Buildroot is not present Note: Invalid buildroot found: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-build See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag [-]: 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. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: 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. [!]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Note: %define requiring justification: %define initsys systemd, %define distro fedora, %define distro redhat, %define initsys sysV [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [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. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [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: WALinuxAgent-2.0.8-6.fc21.noarch.rpm WALinuxAgent-2.0.8-6.fc21.src.rpm WALinuxAgent.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/waagent.conf WALinuxAgent.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/waagent 0700L WALinuxAgent.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary waagent WALinuxAgent.src:22: W: hardcoded-packager-tag Microsoft Corporation <walinuxagent@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ]0;<mock-chroot><mock-chroot>[root@primus /]# rpmlint WALinuxAgent WALinuxAgent.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/waagent.conf WALinuxAgent.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/waagent 0700L WALinuxAgent.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary waagent 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. ]0;<mock-chroot><mock-chroot>[root@primus /]# echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- WALinuxAgent (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/env config(WALinuxAgent) grep iptables net-tools openssh openssl python python-pyasn1 sed sudo systemd util-linux Provides -------- WALinuxAgent: WALinuxAgent config(WALinuxAgent) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/Azure/WALinuxAgent/archive/WALinuxAgent-2.0.8.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : dd463f7dff906ff3ef5eb8152bed9a30892fa8f3e6147e3d15f7d483f4cc6096 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : dd463f7dff906ff3ef5eb8152bed9a30892fa8f3e6147e3d15f7d483f4cc6096 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1159660 -P Python Buildroot used: fedora-21-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, 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