https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299127 --- Comment #5 from Christian Dersch <lupinix@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Review done, there are some things to fix (see below). Btw: I'll add this package to Astronomy Spin once it is approved. Looks like a nice feature, thank you for taking this up :) 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 ===> Looks like typical false positive appearing for months now - 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. Note: License file LICENSE is marked as %doc instead of %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text ===> Next false positive... Maybe %doc includes the file too, but as it is present in %license => OK - update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in virtualplanet See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop- database ===> Please fix this! - Investigate licenses (maybe ask upstream) - Fix directory ownerships ===== 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]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v2 or later)", "MPL (v1.1) LGPL (unversioned/unknown version)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "MPL (v1.1)", "zlib/libpng MPL (v1.1)", "*No copyright* MPL (v1.1) LGPL (unversioned/unknown version)", "BSD (3 clause)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "MPL (v1.1) GPL (unversioned/unknown version)". 432 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/licensecheck.txt ===> Please investigate in detail, looks like we have a case of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Mixed_Source_Licensing_Scenario [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/doc/virtualplanet, /usr/share/virtualplanet, /usr/share/virtualplanet/data ===> Fix required [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/doc/virtualplanet, /usr/share/virtualplanet/data, /usr/share/virtualplanet ===> Fix required [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. Note: icons in virtualplanet [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. ===> We are limited to architectures supported by fpc [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 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]: 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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [-]: 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in virtualplanet-doc , virtualplanet-data-base , virtualplanet-debuginfo [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [-]: 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. [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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint ===> False positive [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 1.2.15 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 Mock Version: 1.2.15 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.15 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-doc-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.noarch.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-data-base-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.noarch.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-debuginfo-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-debuginfo-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 25 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-doc-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.noarch.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-data-base-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.noarch.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-debuginfo-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm /home/review/1299127-virtualplanet/results/virtualplanet-debuginfo-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts WARNING: unable to delete selinux filesystems (/tmp/mock-selinux-plugin.6e0tg2jr): [Errno 1] Operation not permitted: '/tmp/mock-selinux-plugin.6e0tg2jr' Rpmlint ------- Checking: virtualplanet-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm virtualplanet-doc-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.noarch.rpm virtualplanet-data-base-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.noarch.rpm virtualplanet-debuginfo-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.x86_64.rpm virtualplanet-1.0-6.20160119svn99.fc25.src.rpm virtualplanet.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libpasastro(x86-64) virtualplanet.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary virtualplanet virtualplanet-data-base.noarch: W: no-documentation virtualplanet.src: W: strange-permission generate-tarball.sh 755 virtualplanet.src:88: W: configure-without-libdir-spec virtualplanet.src: W: invalid-url Source0: virtualplanet-1.0-src-99-nopatents.tar.xz 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. ===> error is false positive, libpasastro is some kind of plugin here Requires -------- virtualplanet-data-base (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): virtualplanet virtualplanet (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh libGL.so.1()(64bit) libGLU.so.1()(64bit) libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXxf86vm.so.1()(64bit) libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgthread-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpasastro(x86-64) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) virtualplanet-data-base virtualplanet-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): virtualplanet virtualplanet-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- virtualplanet-data-base: virtualplanet-data-base virtualplanet: application() application(virtualplanet.desktop) virtualplanet virtualplanet(x86-64) virtualplanet-doc: virtualplanet-doc virtualplanet-debuginfo: virtualplanet-debuginfo virtualplanet-debuginfo(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtualplanet/files/9-Source_Data/VPA_Base_JPLeph.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0183ce4f01fce6f15640c40e1af7e169398eab885bd506e56a0552ee4c09c7b8 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0183ce4f01fce6f15640c40e1af7e169398eab885bd506e56a0552ee4c09c7b8 http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtualplanet/files/9-Source_Data/VPA_Base_Texture_Mars.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d3f1d88211e597d6f581b462f1532f96a675aac6bfbe2108799d2b6bc6bdd9ab CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d3f1d88211e597d6f581b462f1532f96a675aac6bfbe2108799d2b6bc6bdd9ab http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtualplanet/files/9-Source_Data/VPA_Base_Overlay.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b6faf2cd1775f61372a421b1a971279e44a04a764c5d6067a63c3aa951d1b4ef CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b6faf2cd1775f61372a421b1a971279e44a04a764c5d6067a63c3aa951d1b4ef http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtualplanet/files/9-Source_Data/VPA_Base_Texture_Mars_Historical.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 03e7c658b517b25678af63af71d08957f195b110550b576b4706403d1dca0d73 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 03e7c658b517b25678af63af71d08957f195b110550b576b4706403d1dca0d73 http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtualplanet/files/9-Source_Data/VPA_Base_Texture_Mercury.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : afa5cfab2f922076cca92a75c47b7e68b6d1e1675985589ad11f86d6f7ce6e5e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : afa5cfab2f922076cca92a75c47b7e68b6d1e1675985589ad11f86d6f7ce6e5e http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtualplanet/files/9-Source_Data/VPA_Base_Texture_Venus.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f1743f7eb41eb0c4aeb98713969120db212239c3a4b30d3da110ed84583a5407 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f1743f7eb41eb0c4aeb98713969120db212239c3a4b30d3da110ed84583a5407 http://sourceforge.net/projects/virtualplanet/files/9-Source_Data/VPA_Base_Texture_Mercury_Historical.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 664b015ee7124373834f4be0b9a145e0ce270d63c4e4104801a9971d97606daa CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 664b015ee7124373834f4be0b9a145e0ce270d63c4e4104801a9971d97606daa Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1299127 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