https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174097 --- Comment #7 from Ed Trettevik <eat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- This is an unofficial informal practice review on my own package. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [*] = Packager has considered and believes the package is compliant with policy. Issues: ======= - 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. Note: Cannot find COPYING in rpm(s) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text - using %license instead of %doc for COPYING file - /usr/share/licenses/nodebrain/COPYING found after install ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [*]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [*]: Package contains no static executables. - Shared executables in main package, separate nodebrain-static package [*]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. - not in ld path, these are plug-in modules in versioned subdirectory [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. Generic: [*]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. - MIT License [*]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 180 files have unknown license. - File headers reference MIT License or equivalent NodeBrain License - Both provided in COPYING file [*]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [*]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [*]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [*]: Changelog in prescribed format. [*]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [*]: Development files must be in a -devel package [*]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [*]: Texinfo files are installed using install-info in %post and %preun if package has .info files. Note: Texinfo .info file(s) in nodebrain [*]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [*]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [?]: Package does not generate any conflict. [*]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [*]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [*]: 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. [*]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 112640 bytes in 7 files. [*]: 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). - nodebrain-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib - Only installing libnb.so symbolic link to libnb.so.0 [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]: Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: nodebrain-static. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [*]: Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot: present but not needed - Buildroot is conditionally present for other platforms - not for Fedora >= 19 [*]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: %clean present but not required - %clean section is conditionally present for other platforms - not Fedora >= 19 [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. - license text included [*]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in nodebrain- devel , nodebrain-static - using Requires: nodebrain = %{version}-%{release} - will change to %{name}%{?_isa} [?]: Package functions as described. [*]: Latest version is packaged. [*]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [*]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. - Patches have been applied upstream for next release [*]: 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. [*]: %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]: 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: nodebrain-0.9.03-5.fc21.x86_64.rpm nodebrain-devel-0.9.03-5.fc21.x86_64.rpm nodebrain-static-0.9.03-5.fc21.x86_64.rpm nodebrain-0.9.03-5.fc21.src.rpm nodebrain-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. - This is libnb.so symbolic link to libnb.so.0 Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ^[]0;<mock-chroot>^G<mock-chroot>[root@ip-172-31-6-11 /]# rpmlint nodebrain nodebrain-devel nodebrain-static nodebrain-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. ^[]0;<mock-chroot>^G<mock-chroot>[root@ip-172-31-6-11 /]# echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- nodebrain (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /sbin/install-info /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10)(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libedit.so.0()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libnb.so.0()(64bit) libpcre.so.1()(64bit) libssl.so.10()(64bit) libssl.so.10(libssl.so.10)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) nodebrain-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config glibc-devel libnb.so.0()(64bit) nodebrain openssl-devel pcre-devel pkgconfig nodebrain-static (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodebrain-devel Provides -------- nodebrain: libnb.so.0()(64bit) nodebrain nodebrain(x86-64) nodebrain-devel: nodebrain-devel nodebrain-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(nb) nodebrain-static: nodebrain-static nodebrain-static(x86-64) Unversioned so-files [plug-in modules in versioned subdirectory] -------------------- nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_audit.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_baseline.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_cache.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_console.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_mail.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_message.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_netflow.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_peer.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_pipe.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_servant.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_set.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_snmptrap.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_string.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_syslog.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_toy.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_translator.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_tree.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_udp.so nodebrain: /usr/lib64/nb-0/nb_webster.so Source checksums ---------------- http://downloads.sourceforge.net/nodebrain/nodebrain-0.9.03.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e9fce23525da8c6b3e553492b724eb2122faf22aed92ed45b15c6018eb643fef CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e9fce23525da8c6b3e553492b724eb2122faf22aed92ed45b15c6018eb643fef Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1174097 Buildroot used: fedora-21-x86_64 [rawhide preferred] 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