https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1231427 --- Comment #14 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Dave Johansen from comment #13) > Issues: > ======= > [!]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. > Several .so files in %_libdir. Are these ok? Yes, they are in private %_libdir sub-directories. > [!]: 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 Fixed. > [!]: 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 Only /usr/share/copasi must be owned by this package. > [!]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. > Missing -debuginfo. Disabled. There is still the debugedit error. > [!]: 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 Only COPASI and COPASI-gui need COPASI-data. All the others are stand-alone package. > [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise > justified. > Needs to be fixed All patches are commented. > > 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. It's not need to me. > > ===== 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. SPEC: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/COPASI/COPASI.spec SRPM: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/COPASI/COPASI-4.16.101-11.20150725git435d61.fc22.src.rpm -- 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