https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1228425 Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |npmccallum@xxxxxxxxxx Flags| |needinfo?(npmccallum@redhat | |.com) --- Comment #3 from Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - License file COPYING is marked as %doc instead of %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text - Needs to include "%dir /usr/lib[64]/deo" and "%dir /usr/lib[64]/deo/plugins" in %files - Need to add "Requires: dracut" for /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/ - Need to add "Requires: systemd" for /usr/lib/systemd/system - Add V=1 to the make command to not suppress build flags (impossible to verify they are being applied properly. - Fully-versioned dependencies for the subpackages need to include %{?isa} to ensure they pull in the same architecture ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [X]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [X]: Package contains no static executables. [X]: 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. [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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v3 or later)". Detailed output of licensecheck in /dev/shm/1228425-deo/licensecheck.txt [X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/60deo, /usr/lib64/deo/plugins, /usr/lib64/deo [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/systemd/system, /usr/lib64/deo/plugins, /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/60deo, /usr/lib64/deo, /usr/lib/systemd [?]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [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. [-]: 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. [X]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [!]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 2 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]: 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]: Dist tag is present. [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 does not use a name that already exists. [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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in deo- server , deo-client , deo-client-disks [?]: 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. [-]: 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]: 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: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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: deo-0.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm deo-server-0.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm deo-client-0.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm deo-client-disks-0.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm deo-0.4-1.fc23.src.rpm deo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deo deo-server.x86_64: W: no-documentation deo-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/deo/encrypt.pem deo-server.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/deo/encrypt.pem deo-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/deo/decryptd.pem deo-server.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/deo/decryptd.pem deo-client.x86_64: W: no-documentation deo-client-disks.x86_64: W: no-documentation deo.src:112: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/dracut/modules.d/60%{name}/module-setup.sh deo.src: W: invalid-url Source0: https://github.com/npmccallum/deo/releases/download/r0.4/deo-0.4.tar.gz HTTP Error 403: Forbidden 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: deo-debuginfo-0.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.8 starting (python version = 3.4.2)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled ccache Mock Version: 1.2.8 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.8 Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/sbin/mock", line 831, in <module> main() File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 84, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File "/usr/sbin/mock", line 653, in main run_command(options, args, config_opts, commands, buildroot, state) File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 84, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File "/usr/sbin/mock", line 708, in run_command commands.init() File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 84, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/backend.py", line 123, in init self.buildroot.initialize(**kwargs) File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 84, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/buildroot.py", line 84, in initialize self._init(prebuild=prebuild, do_log=do_log) File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 84, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/buildroot.py", line 128, in _init self._setup_devices() File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 84, in trace result = func(*args, **kw) File "/usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/mockbuild/buildroot.py", line 442, in _setup_devices os.symlink("/proc/self/mounts", self.make_chroot_path('etc', 'mtab')) FileExistsError: [Errno 17] File exists: '/proc/self/mounts' -> '/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/etc/mtab' Requires -------- deo-client-disks (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/bash /bin/sh deo dracut-network libc.so.6()(64bit) libcryptsetup.so.4()(64bit) libcryptsetup.so.4(CRYPTSETUP_1.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) deo-server (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh deo libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libsystemd.so.0()(64bit) libsystemd.so.0(LIBSYSTEMD_209)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) deo-client (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): deo libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) deo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10)(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libssl.so.10()(64bit) libssl.so.10(libssl.so.10)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) systemd Provides -------- deo-client-disks: deo-client-disks deo-client-disks(x86-64) petera-client-disks deo-server: deo-server deo-server(x86-64) petera-server deo-client: deo-client deo-client(x86-64) petera-client deo: deo deo(x86-64) petera Unversioned so-files -------------------- deo-server: /usr/lib64/deo/plugins/decryptd.so deo-client: /usr/lib64/deo/plugins/decrypt.so deo-client: /usr/lib64/deo/plugins/encrypt.so deo-client: /usr/lib64/deo/plugins/query.so deo-client: /usr/lib64/deo/plugins/targets.so deo-client-disks: /usr/lib64/deo/plugins/askpassd.so deo-client-disks: /usr/lib64/deo/plugins/cryptsetup.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/npmccallum/deo/releases/download/r0.4/deo-0.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0f633f1bf49c4de3aa4c6b0c22ec4d87696d035c30ea736bfd7a7fcc6aa94074 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0f633f1bf49c4de3aa4c6b0c22ec4d87696d035c30ea736bfd7a7fcc6aa94074 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1228425 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 -- 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