https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1231427 --- Comment #13 from Dave Johansen <davejohansen@xxxxxxxxx> --- Issues: ======= [!]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Several .so files in %_libdir. Are these ok? [!]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. license.txt does not appear to be Artistic 2.0 and states "You cannot redistribute this test version." [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Several licenses found by licensecheck. Here's the list: BSD (2 clause) -------------- COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/randomGenerator/Cmt19937.cpp COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/randomGenerator/Cmt19937.h GPL (v2 or later) ----------------- COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/model/CChemEqParser_yacc.cpp COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/model/CChemEqParser_yacc.hpp GPL (v2 or later) GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) ---------------------------------------------------------------- COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/MIRIAM/WebServicesIssues/stdsoap2.cpp COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/MIRIAM/WebServicesIssues/stdsoap2.h GPL (v3 or later) ----------------- COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/function/CEvaluationParser_yacc.cpp COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/function/CEvaluationParser_yacc.hpp LGPL ---- COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/sbml/IdList.h MIT/X11 (BSD like) ------------------ COPASI-192df43f09810b4416c7c59bec08ed63a2c22186/copasi/GL/glext.h [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/auto, /usr/lib/perl5, /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl, /usr/lib/mono, /usr/share/copasi, /usr/share/java [!]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. Missing -debuginfo. [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. I'm not sure which of these are appropriate, but: Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in COPASI- gui , COPASI-data , python-COPASI , python3-COPASI , java-COPASI , perl-COPASI , R-COPASI , COPASI-sharp , COPASI-doc [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. Needs to be fixed Other Issues: ======= [!]: examples are in -data but would it make sense for them to be somewhere else? [!]: I would recommend making the .desktop and .appdata.xml sources to simplify the .spec file. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [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. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. [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]: 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 %license. [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 contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [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]: 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 Java: [x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Python: [-]: 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. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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). [?]: 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. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. NOTE: Tests are of packaging and not of COPASI itself [x]: 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 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: COPASI-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm COPASI-gui-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm COPASI-data-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.noarch.rpm python-COPASI-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm python3-COPASI-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm java-COPASI-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm perl-COPASI-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm R-COPASI-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm COPASI-sharp-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.i686.rpm COPASI-doc-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.noarch.rpm COPASI-4.16.101-8.20150707git192df4.fc23.src.rpm COPASI.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/CopasiSE COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary CopasiSE COPASI-gui.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization COPASI-gui.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/CopasiUI COPASI-gui.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI-gui.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary CopasiUI COPASI-data.noarch: W: no-documentation python-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/copasi/_COPASI.so python-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation python3-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/copasi/_COPASI.so python3-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation java-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/copasi/libCopasiJava.so java-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation perl-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/COPASI/COPASI.so perl-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation R-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/R/library/COPASI/libs/COPASI.so R-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation R-COPASI.i686: E: zero-length /usr/lib/R/library/COPASI/help/AnIndex R-COPASI.i686: E: zero-length /usr/lib/R/library/COPASI/help/COPASI.rdb COPASI-sharp.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/mono/copasicsP/libcopasics.so COPASI-sharp.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation COPASI.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization COPASI.src:489: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/mono/copasicsP/ 11 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 23 warnings. Only issue of concern seems to be the unstripped files, but I'm guessing that that's related to the -debuginfo not working. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- perl-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/COPASI/COPASI.so perl-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation java-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/copasi/libCopasiJava.so java-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI-gui.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/CopasiUI COPASI-gui.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI-gui.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary CopasiUI R-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/R/library/COPASI/libs/COPASI.so R-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation R-COPASI.i686: E: zero-length /usr/lib/R/library/COPASI/help/AnIndex R-COPASI.i686: E: zero-length /usr/lib/R/library/COPASI/help/COPASI.rdb COPASI-sharp.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/mono/copasicsP/libcopasics.so COPASI-sharp.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation python-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/copasi/_COPASI.so python-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation python3-COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages/copasi/_COPASI.so python3-COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI.i686: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/CopasiSE COPASI.i686: W: no-documentation COPASI.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary CopasiSE COPASI-data.noarch: W: no-documentation 10 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 20 warnings. Same comment as above. -- 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