https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491281 --- Comment #9 from Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 1536000 bytes in 94 files. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation - Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/python3.6/site- packages/sassutils, /usr/lib64/python3.6/site- packages/libsass-0.13.2-py3.6.egg-info, /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/libsass-0.13.2-py2.7.egg-info, /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/sassutils - Package generates a conflict with the ruby version of sassc (will be solved with next upstream release) - Please add link to upstream discussion as a comment near the patches - Please don't mix spaces and tabs (I recommend sticking with spaces) python-libsass.src:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 12) ===== 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. (They are not. Verified.) [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. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/libsass-0.13.2-py2.7.egg-info, /usr/lib64/python3.6/site- packages/sassutils, /usr/lib64/python3.6/site- packages/libsass-0.13.2-py3.6.egg-info, /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/sassutils [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/python3.6/site- packages/sassutils, /usr/lib64/python3.6/site- packages/libsass-0.13.2-py3.6.egg-info, /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/libsass-0.13.2-py2.7.egg-info, /usr/lib64/python2.7/site- packages/sassutils [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]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [!]: Package does not generate any conflict. [ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: 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 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 Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. Not applicable here, just docs, it runs in one thread anyway [-]: 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [?]: Package functions as described. [?]: 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. [ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: 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: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1556480 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). Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-libsass-0.13.2-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm python3-libsass-0.13.2-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm python-libsass-debuginfo-0.13.2-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm python-libsass-0.13.2-1.fc28.src.rpm python2-libsass.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/python2-libsass/html/.buildinfo python3-libsass.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/python3-libsass/html/.buildinfo python-libsass.src:12: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 12) 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: python-libsass-debuginfo-0.13.2-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- python-libsass-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/dahlia/libsass-python <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> python3-libsass.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/dahlia/libsass-python <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> python3-libsass.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/python3-libsass/html/.buildinfo python2-libsass.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/dahlia/libsass-python <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> python2-libsass.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/doc/python2-libsass/html/.buildinfo 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Invalid URLs is false possitive (no connection from mock) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/churchyard/rpmbuild/FedoraReview/1491281-python-libsass/srpm/python-libsass.spec 2017-10-05 16:58:37.752799878 +0200 +++ /home/churchyard/rpmbuild/FedoraReview/1491281-python-libsass/srpm-unpacked/python-libsass.spec 2017-09-26 18:32:50.000000000 +0200 @@ -74,5 +74,5 @@ %files -n python2-%{srcname} %license LICENSE -%doc README.rst docs/_build/html/ +%doc README.rst docs/_build/html %{python2_sitearch}/_sass.so %{python2_sitearch}/libsass-0.13.2-py%{python2_version}.egg-info/* ^ Please fix this as well, but not a big deal. Requires -------- python-libsass-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python3-libsass (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libpython3.6m.so.1.0()(64bit) libsass.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) python(abi) python3-six rtld(GNU_HASH) python2-libsass (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libpython2.7.so.1.0()(64bit) libsass.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) python(abi) python2-six rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- python-libsass-debuginfo: python-libsass-debuginfo python-libsass-debuginfo(x86-64) python3-libsass: python3-libsass python3-libsass(x86-64) python3.6dist(libsass) python3dist(libsass) python2-libsass: python-libsass python-libsass(x86-64) python2-libsass python2-libsass(x86-64) python2.7dist(libsass) python2dist(libsass) Unversioned so-files -------------------- (This is fine on Python) python2-libsass: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/_sass.so python3-libsass: /usr/lib64/python3.6/site-packages/_sass.cpython-36m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/dahlia/libsass-python/archive/0.13.2.tar.gz#/libsass-0.13.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0d919cef7e4033f900daee2ec7dfc54b30351bc2d64a41c9eacd4028b4d25878 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0d919cef7e4033f900daee2ec7dfc54b30351bc2d64a41c9eacd4028b4d25878 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (7737a2a) last change: 2015-11-26 Command line :./try-fedora-review -b 1491281 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, SugarActivity, fonts, Haskell, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby 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
