https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1330330 Michael Scherer <misc@xxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |misc@xxxxxxxx QA Contact|extras-qa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |misc@xxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Michael Scherer <misc@xxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - why is there a git config call in %check ? - unowned directories, see review - package is wrongly named (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Go#Package_Names for a example) - see rpmlint for spelling errors ===== MUST items ===== 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: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD (3 clause)", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated", "BSD (2 clause)". 48 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/misc/checkout/git/FedoraReview/1330330-golang- tools-godep/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/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com/kr, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com/pmezard, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com/pmezard /go-difflib, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org/x/tools, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org/x/tools/go, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org/x [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com/kr, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org/x/tools, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org/x/tools/go, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/golang.org/x, /usr/share/gocode, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com/pmezard, /usr/share/gocode/src, /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep/Godeps/_workspace/src/github.com/pmezard /go-difflib [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools(godep-devel), /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/tools/godep(godep-devel) [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. [x]: 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). [!]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 4 files. [!]: 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]: 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in golang- tools-godep-devel , golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel [-]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [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: golang-tools-godep-devel-62-1.fc25.noarch.rpm golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel-62-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm golang-tools-godep-62-1.fc25.src.rpm golang-tools-godep-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) reproducibly -> reproducible, producible, irreducibly golang-tools-godep-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US reproducibly -> reproducible, producible, irreducibly golang-tools-godep-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, GitHub golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, GitHub golang-tools-godep.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) reproducibly -> reproducible, producible, irreducibly golang-tools-godep.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US reproducibly -> reproducible, producible, irreducibly 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, GitHub golang-tools-godep-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) reproducibly -> reproducible, producible, irreducibly golang-tools-godep-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US reproducibly -> reproducible, producible, irreducibly golang-tools-godep-devel.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US github -> git hub, git-hub, GitHub 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Requires -------- golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): golang-tools-godep-devel golang-tools-godep-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel: golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel golang-tools-godep-unit-test-devel(x86-64) golang-tools-godep-devel: golang-tools-godep-devel Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/tools/godep/archive/v62.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a7e1e4af885a245907d37b19614026af8babbecb5b078832a414da7ee90cac3f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a7e1e4af885a245907d37b19614026af8babbecb5b078832a414da7ee90cac3f Generated by fedora-review 0.4.0 (cf29f98) last change: 2013-02-08 Command line :./try-fedora-review -b 1330330 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, 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 http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx