https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1413399 Christian Dersch <lupinix@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Christian Dersch <lupinix@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Package is fine => Approved! Just use the %license tag for the COPYING files, but as you can do this on import easily it is not a showstopper here. Also thank you to use Debian patch to rename the library, other distributions use this too => We have it similar in different distributions :) Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - 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 COPYING is not marked as %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text ===> Please use the %license tag for COPYING - Package does not use a name that already exists. Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/wcstools See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Package_Names ===> We will unretire this package => Fine ===== 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]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. 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. [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. [-]: 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). [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 194560 bytes in 7 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]: 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 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. ===> Is ok in this case, we get build issues otherwise... Comment added in spec => Fine [-]: 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 wcstools-libs , wcstools-devel , wcstools-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. [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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. ===> Koji build succeded https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17299795 [-]: %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: [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]: 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: wcstools-3.9.4-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm wcstools-libs-3.9.4-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm wcstools-devel-3.9.4-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm wcstools-debuginfo-3.9.4-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm wcstools-3.9.4-1.fc26.src.rpm wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary cphead wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary getdate wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary newfits wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary immatch wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imresize wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gettab wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary filext wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary addpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sp2char wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imstack wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary filename wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary remap wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bincat wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imsmooth wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fixpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fileroot wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary isrange wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary getpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary conpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary isfile wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary getfits wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary isfits wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary char2sp wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary crlf wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imfill wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sumpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imextract wcstools-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libwcs -> libels wcstools-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libwcstools.so.1.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 wcstools-libs.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wcstools-libs/COPYING wcstools-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib wcstools-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wcstools-devel/COPYING 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 31 warnings. ===> You should report the wrong FSF address upstream. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: wcstools-debuginfo-3.9.4-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory wcstools-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib wcstools-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wcstools-devel/COPYING wcstools-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libwcs -> libels wcstools-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libwcstools.so.1.0.0 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 wcstools-libs.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/wcstools-libs/COPYING wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary addpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bincat wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary char2sp wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary conpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary cphead wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary crlf wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary filename wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fileroot wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary filext wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fixpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary getdate wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary getfits wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary getpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gettab wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imextract wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imfill wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary immatch wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imresize wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imsmooth wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imstack wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary isfile wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary isfits wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary isrange wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary newfits wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary remap wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sp2char wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary subpix wcstools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sumpix 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 31 warnings. Requires -------- wcstools-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libwcstools.so.1()(64bit) wcstools-libs(x86-64) wcstools-libs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) wcstools-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): wcstools (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libwcstools.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- wcstools-devel: wcstools-devel wcstools-devel(x86-64) wcstools-libs: libwcstools.so.1()(64bit) wcstools-libs wcstools-libs(x86-64) wcstools-debuginfo: wcstools-debuginfo wcstools-debuginfo(x86-64) wcstools: wcstools wcstools(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- http://tdc-www.harvard.edu/software/wcstools/wcstools-3.9.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 92aceebb7c4409706bd1d30abe020ab0516a2bf507719e60aede6498ce5e4b7d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 92aceebb7c4409706bd1d30abe020ab0516a2bf507719e60aede6498ce5e4b7d Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1413399 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx