https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1305335 --- Comment #2 from Mukundan Ragavan <nonamedotc@xxxxxxxxx> --- Complete review below - not too many issues here. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines ---> Non-issue. Installs fine. # rpm -q R-Rcpp R-Rcpp-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64 - Package have the default element marked as %%doc :doc, DESCRIPTION, CITATION ---> This looks fine. Already discussed before (bz#1305333, bz#1305334 - Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: R-Rcpp : /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/skeleton/rcpp_hello_world.h ---> What about this file? Looking at the contents, this sounds like something that is appropriate in the main package. Please verify. R-Rcpp-examples : /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve10_cpp.h R-Rcpp-examples : /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/loopmacro.h R-Rcpp- examples : /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/SugarPerformance/Timer.h See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages ---> These two I do not have an issue with. Clearly they are examples and belong here. - Package requires R-core. ---> This looks good. Has arch specific requires. - Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires. Note: Missing BuildRequires on R-devel, tex(latex) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:R ---> Non issue. Already discussed before. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [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]: 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSL", "BSL (v1.0)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 96 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/licensecheck.txt ---> Multiple licenses must be mentioned in spec file. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios from licensecheck - BSL --- R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp/utils/tinyformat.h BSL (v1.0) ---------- R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp/macros/cat.hpp R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp/macros/config.hpp GPL (v2 or later) ----------------- R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/examples/SugarPerformance/Timer.h R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp.h R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp/Benchmark/Timer.h R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp/DataFrame.h R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp/Date.h R-Rcpp-0.12.3/Rcpp/inst/include/Rcpp/DateVector.h [.....] Change spec file to License: GPLv2+ and BSL [-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. ---> Not present in upstream tarball. Perhaps you should bring it to their attention. You can include the license if you wish. [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. [-]: 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. [-]: 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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]: 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 R: [x]: The package has the standard %install section. ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag Note: Could not download Source0: ftp://cran.r-project.org/pub/R/contrib/main/Rcpp_0.12.3.tar.gz See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags ---> local issue again. Everything is fine. Changing to [x]. [?]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. ---> Please see my comment above. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in R-Rcpp- debuginfo [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. ---> However, please see my comment above and https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. R: [x]: The %check macro is present [x]: Latest version is packaged. Note: Latest upstream version is 0.12.3, packaged version is 0.12.3 ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint ---> This k=just keeps happening here. But, I can install the package no problem. # rpm -q R-Rcpp R-Rcpp-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64 Changed to [x]. [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. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.14 starting (python version = 3.4.3)... 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: 1.2.14 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.14 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-devel-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-examples-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-debuginfo-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-debuginfo-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 24 --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-devel-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-examples-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-debuginfo-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/mukundan/ownCloud/misc_pkgs/pkg_reviews/1305335-R-Rcpp/results/R-Rcpp-debuginfo-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: R-Rcpp-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm R-Rcpp-devel-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm R-Rcpp-examples-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm R-Rcpp-debuginfo-0.12.3-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm R-Rcpp-0.12.3-1.fc24.src.rpm R-Rcpp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/skeleton/stdVector.cpp R-Rcpp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/skeleton/rcpp_hello_world.h R-Rcpp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/skeleton/rcpp_module.cpp R-Rcpp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/skeleton/rcpp_hello_world.cpp R-Rcpp.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/discovery/cxx0x.R 644 /bin/env ---> Please check/clarify these ... R-Rcpp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/skeleton/Num.cpp R-Rcpp.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/skeleton/rcpp_hello_world_attributes.cpp R-Rcpp-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib R-Rcpp-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: no-documentation R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/Attributes/Depends.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve8_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve14_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/Misc/ifelseLooped.r 644 /usr/bin/r R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve13_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/overhead.r 644 /usr/bin/r R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/overhead_2.c R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/overhead.sh 644 /bin/bash R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/SugarPerformance/Timer.h R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/OpenMP/piWithInterrupts.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/Misc/newFib.r 644 /usr/bin/r R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve12_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve2_c.c R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/overhead_1.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve11_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/OpenMP/OpenMPandInline.r 644 /usr/bin/r R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/loopmacro.h R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/Attributes/Export.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/SugarPerformance/Timertest.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve4_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve7_c.c R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve10_cpp.h R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/Misc/piSugar.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve3_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve5_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve9_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp-examples.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/examples/ConvolveBenchmarks/convolve10_cpp.cpp R-Rcpp.src: W: invalid-url Source0: ftp://cran.r-project.org/pub/R/contrib/main/Rcpp_0.12.3.tar.gz <urlopen error ftp error: timeout('timed out',)> 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 33 warnings. ---> Most of the examples rpmlint messages can be ignored. Requires -------- R-Rcpp-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): R-Rcpp-examples (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/bash /usr/bin/r R-Rcpp(x86-64) R-Rcpp (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): R-core(x86-64) libR.so()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) R-Rcpp-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): R-Rcpp(x86-64) R-core-devel(x86-64) Provides -------- R-Rcpp-debuginfo: R-Rcpp-debuginfo R-Rcpp-debuginfo(x86-64) R-Rcpp-examples: R-Rcpp-examples R-Rcpp-examples(x86-64) R-Rcpp: R-Rcpp R-Rcpp(x86-64) R-Rcpp-devel: R-Rcpp-devel R-Rcpp-devel(x86-64) Unversioned so-files -------------------- R-Rcpp: /usr/lib64/R/library/Rcpp/libs/Rcpp.so Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1305335 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, R, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, 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