https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1427017 James Hogarth <james.hogarth@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from James Hogarth <james.hogarth@xxxxxxxxx> --- ===== Issues ===== * Owns directory in common with another package - There is no parent package and the common ownership is valid * Old boilerplate in spec file - Please remove older boilerplate before import * Hard coded /usr/share/php in the autoloader * Slightly inconsistent with general use of %{_datadir}/php ===== 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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "*No copyright* MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/james/workspace/fedora-scm/1427017-php-psr- container/licensecheck.txt [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/php/Psr(php- PsrLog) [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: %defattr present but not needed [-]: 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. [!]: 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]: 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 10240 bytes in 2 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]: 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. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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]: 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: [!]: Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot: present but not needed [!]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: %clean present but not required [-]: 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). [?]: 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]: 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]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [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 all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. PHP: [x]: Run phpci static analyze on all php files. Note: phpCompatInfo version 5.0.4 DB version 1.18.0 built Feb 24 2017 14:46:51 CET static analyze results in /home/james/workspace/fedora- scm/1427017-php-psr-container/phpci.log Rpmlint ------- Checking: php-psr-container-1.0.0-1.fc26.noarch.rpm php-psr-container-1.0.0-1.fc26.src.rpm php-psr-container.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Autoloader -> Auto loader, Auto-loader, Freeloader php-psr-container.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autoload -> auto load, auto-load, tautology php-psr-container.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Autoloader -> Auto loader, Auto-loader, Freeloader php-psr-container.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US usr -> use, us, user php-psr-container.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autoload -> auto load, auto-load, tautology 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory php-psr-container.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Autoloader -> Auto loader, Auto-loader, Freeloader php-psr-container.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autoload -> auto load, auto-load, tautology 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Requires -------- php-psr-container (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): php(language) php-composer(fedora/autoloader) Provides -------- php-psr-container: php-composer(psr/container) php-psr-container Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/php-fig/container/archive/b7ce3b176482dbbc1245ebf52b181af44c2cf55f/php-psr-container-1.0.0-b7ce3b176482dbbc1245ebf52b181af44c2cf55f.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 93b0edb2c080df4707bcf8d0ebffd9edac3dbf2a32b9f7268b2bc374d9409b97 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 93b0edb2c080df4707bcf8d0ebffd9edac3dbf2a32b9f7268b2bc374d9409b97 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1427017 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, PHP, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 ===== Conclusion ===== Package is APPROVED with the old boilerplate stripped out before import. -- 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