https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1467003 --- Comment #9 from Vitaly Zaitsev <vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- You should fix obsoleted m4s: AC_PROG_LIBTOOL found in: libgpiod-0.3/configure.ac:32. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. Note: These BR are not needed: gcc See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 ===== 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v2.1)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/vitaly/1467003-libgpiod/licensecheck.txt [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. [x]: 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. [x]: 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. [x]: 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. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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]: 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]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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 ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment. See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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: libgpiod-0.3-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libgpiod-utils-0.3-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libgpiod-devel-0.3-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libgpiod-debuginfo-0.3-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libgpiod-0.3-2.fc28.src.rpm libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) linux -> Linux libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US linux -> Linux libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpiod -> period libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sysfs -> sysops libgpiod.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id libgpiod.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpiodetect libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpiofind libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpioget libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpioinfo libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpiomon libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpioset libgpiod-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib libgpiod-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgpiod.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) linux -> Linux libgpiod.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US linux -> Linux libgpiod.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpiod -> period libgpiod.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sysfs -> sysops 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 22 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: libgpiod-utils-debuginfo-0.3-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libgpiod-debuginfo-0.3-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libgpiod-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: useless-provides debuginfo(build-id) libgpiod-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) linux -> Linux libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US linux -> Linux libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gpiod -> period libgpiod.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sysfs -> sysops libgpiod-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: useless-provides debuginfo(build-id) libgpiod-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources libgpiod-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib libgpiod-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-documentation libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpiodetect libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpiofind libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpioget libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpioinfo libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpiomon libgpiod-utils.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gpioset 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 14 warnings. Requires -------- libgpiod (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) libgpiod-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libgpiod-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libgpiod(x86-64) libgpiod.so.0()(64bit) libgpiod-utils (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgpiod(x86-64) libgpiod.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- libgpiod: libgpiod libgpiod(x86-64) libgpiod.so.0()(64bit) libgpiod-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) libgpiod-debuginfo libgpiod-debuginfo(x86-64) libgpiod-devel: libgpiod-devel libgpiod-devel(x86-64) libgpiod-utils: libgpiod-utils libgpiod-utils(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/brgl/libgpiod/archive/v0.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 24794006c14194e269b944f2cca0e85e481f1538be3c143479c4c6691bf25add CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 24794006c14194e269b944f2cca0e85e481f1538be3c143479c4c6691bf25add AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found ------------------------------ AC_PROG_LIBTOOL found in: libgpiod-0.3/configure.ac:32 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1467003 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 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
