https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359416 --- Comment #8 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkaspar@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Regarding the review itself: 1) %description - the word 'indlude' seems redundant, but this is nothing serious ---------------- 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 ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [X]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [X]: Package contains no static executables. [X]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. >> Doesn't apply here, the main purpose of this package is to provide an extension (as .so file) for gawk. 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: "GPL", "GPL (v3)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Perl", "FSF All Permissive". 180 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /root/review-gawk- xml/licensecheck.txt >> License field should probably be (based on contents of binary rpm and how the rpm is built): GPLv2+ and GPLv3+ [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. >> License file for GPLv3+ is installed, license file fo GPLv2+ is missing. [X]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/.build- id(gawkextlib) >> .build-id is property of Fedora Rawhide, this is OK. [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. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [X]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [X]: Texinfo files are installed using install-info in %post and %preun if package has .info files. Note: Texinfo .info file(s) in gawk-xml [X]: The spec file handles locales properly. [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 10240 bytes in 2 files. [X]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines ===== 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. >> Andy, will you provide the GPLv2+ file in the source code as well? [X]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in gawk- xml-debuginfo [X]: Package functions as described. [X]: Latest version is packaged. [-]: 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. [?]: 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. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [X]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.4.2 starting (python version = 3.5.3)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux disabled 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 INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 1.4.2 INFO: Mock Version: 1.4.2 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /root/review-gawk-xml/results/gawk-xml-1.0.5-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm /root/review-gawk-xml/results/gawk-xml-debuginfo-1.0.5-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm ERROR: Command failed: # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 27 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=False install /root/review-gawk-xml/results/gawk-xml-1.0.5-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm /root/review-gawk-xml/results/gawk-xml-debuginfo-1.0.5-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm There seems to be some problems with mock or DNF in F26/rawhide, see e.g.: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1299482#c22 I have manually tested the installation, it was OK. Rpmlint ------- Checking: gawk-xml-1.0.5-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm gawk-xml-debuginfo-1.0.5-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm gawk-xml-1.0.5-1.fc27.src.rpm gawk-xml.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id gawk-xml.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id >> As noted above, this is a Fedora-Rawhide thing. gawk-xml.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xmlgawk >> There are other manual pages, but you could create some short man page for 'xmlgawk' as well, Andy. Depends if you think its worth the effort. :) gawk-xml.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xmlgawk -> gawkily 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. >> Nah, this is correct. Requires -------- gawk-xml-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gawk-xml (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh expat gawk info libc.so.6()(64bit) libexpat.so.1()(64bit) libgawkextlib.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- gawk-xml-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) gawk-xml-debuginfo gawk-xml-debuginfo(x86-64) gawk-xml: gawk-xml gawk-xml(x86-64) Unversioned so-files -------------------- gawk-xml: /usr/lib64/gawk/xml.so Source checksums ---------------- https://sourceforge.net/projects/gawkextlib/files/gawk-xml-1.0.5.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 8d7bb4d7710c25619a42ae2ede76f4100ad0abea4a7851899d6595957842188f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8d7bb4d7710c25619a42ae2ede76f4100ad0abea4a7851899d6595957842188f Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n gawk-xml 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
