[Bug 1353343] Review Request: qmc2 - M.A.M.E. Catalog / Launcher II

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1353343



--- Comment #3 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> ---
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======

- Please, unbundle minizip and zlib

- qchdman is a stand-alone package that does not provide an own license file.

- Please, leave a comment about the patches.

- Language files (arcade/translations) are not installed.

- 'qmc2' provides PDF.js (JavaScript / HTML 5 PDF rendering library).
  Set a Provides tag with PDF.js and include its license file (ASL 2.0)

- Include the MIT license of 'qmc2/data/js/pdfjs/web/l10n.js'

In summary,

qmc2's License tag should be 'GPLv2 and ASL 2.0 and MIT'
qchdman's License tag should be 'GPLv2'

- /usr/share/qmc2/doc is a broken link.

- There is something wrong in manpage file:

$ man --warning ./qmc2-main-gui.6.gz >/dev/null
<standard input>:1: warning: macro `"' not defined

===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[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: "Apache (v2.0)", "GPL (unversioned/unknown version)", "Unknown
     or generated", "*No copyright* GPL", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)",
     "zlib/libpng", "LGPL (v2.1)", "BSD (3 clause)", "GPL (v2)". 363 files
     have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/sagitter/1353343-qmc2/licensecheck.txt
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[!]: 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
[!]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 337920 bytes in 24 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]: Package installs properly.
[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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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 qchdman
     , qmc2-debuginfo
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[-]: 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.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
     Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 9410560 bytes in /usr/share
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: qmc2-0.65-2.fc25.i686.rpm
          qchdman-0.65-2.fc25.i686.rpm
          qmc2-debuginfo-0.65-2.fc25.i686.rpm
          qmc2-0.65-2.fc25.src.rpm
qmc2.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontend -> fronted, front
end, front-end
qmc2.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man6/qmc2-main-gui.6.gz 1:
warning: macro `"' not defined
qmc2.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/qmc2/doc ../doc/qmc2-0.65
qchdman.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US chdman -> Chapman
qchdman.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man6/qchdman.6.gz 1:
warning: macro `"' not defined
qmc2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontend -> fronted, front
end, front-end
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: qmc2-debuginfo-0.65-2.fc25.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
qmc2.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US frontend -> fronted, front
end, front-end
qmc2.i686: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/qmc2/doc ../doc/qmc2-0.65
qmc2.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man6/qmc2-main-gui.6.gz 1:
warning: macro `"' not defined
qchdman.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US chdman -> Chapman
qchdman.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man6/qchdman.6.gz 1:
warning: macro `"' not defined
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.



Requires
--------
qmc2-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

qmc2 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    config(qmc2)
    games-menus
    libQtCore.so.4
    libQtGui.so.4
    libQtNetwork.so.4
    libQtSql.so.4
    libQtSvg.so.4
    libQtTest.so.4
    libQtWebKit.so.4
    libQtXml.so.4
    libQtXmlPatterns.so.4
    libSDL2-2.0.so.0
    libX11.so.6
    libc.so.6
    libgcc_s.so.1
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)
    libm.so.6
    libphonon.so.4
    libpthread.so.0
    libstdc++.so.6
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

qchdman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libQtCore.so.4
    libQtGui.so.4
    libQtScript.so.4
    libQtScriptTools.so.4
    libc.so.6
    libgcc_s.so.1
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)
    libm.so.6
    libpthread.so.0
    libstdc++.so.6
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)
    mame-tools
    rtld(GNU_HASH)



Provides
--------
qmc2-debuginfo:
    qmc2-debuginfo
    qmc2-debuginfo(x86-32)

qmc2:
    application()
    application(qmc2-sdlmame.desktop)
    bundled(lzma-sdk)
    config(qmc2)
    qmc2
    qmc2(x86-32)

qchdman:
    application()
    application(qchdman.desktop)
    qchdman
    qchdman(x86-32)



Source checksums
----------------
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/qmc2/qmc2-0.65.tar.bz2 :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
85a3bf50b7902afc58306ea79fd4d5fde3ec6b36c3bded89f2f9ed876bc6a475
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
85a3bf50b7902afc58306ea79fd4d5fde3ec6b36c3bded89f2f9ed876bc6a475


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-i386 -b 1353343
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R,
PHP
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://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]