https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1594430 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zebob.m@xxxxxxxxx --- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m@xxxxxxxxx> --- - Grab the license directly fron the Github repo and install it: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/JonathanSalwan/ROPgadget/282d8516f21c85b17cab95165620bb4009cc68a0/COPYING (Please note the license change for the next release). - Tests fail because you're missing python-capstone as a BR: + /usr/bin/python2 setup.py test running test Searching for capstone Reading https://pypi.org/simple/capstone/ BuildRequires: %{py2_dist capstone} BuildRequires: %{py3_dist capstone} - Install fails like Marcel Plch mentionned because python3-capstone is packaged as capstone-python3: a good opportunity to use the standardized names macros: Requires: %{py2_dist capstone} and Requires: %{py3_dist capstone} - There's no test provided so no need to run %check - %{_bindir}/* should only be installed with the latest binaries you installed with py_install, so in the python3 subpackage. If you want to install both Python 2 and Python 3 binaries, copy them with a suffix: %install %py2_install mv %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{srcname} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{srcname}-%{python2_version} ln -s %{_bindir}/%{srcname}-%{python2_version} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{srcname}-2 %py3_install mv %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{srcname} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{srcname}-%{python3_version} ln -s %{_bindir}/%{srcname}-%{python3_version} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{srcname}-3 ln -s %{_bindir}/%{srcname}-%{python3_version} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{srcname} Then in %files: %files -n python2-%{srcname} %{_bindir}/%{srcname}-%{python2_version} %{_bindir}/%{srcname}-2 %files -n python3-%{srcname} %{_bindir}/%{srcname}-%{python3_version} %{_bindir}/%{srcname}-3 %{_bindir}/%{srcname} - As Marcel Plch said, be more specific in %files: %files -n python2-%{srcname} %{python2_sitelib}/ropgadget %{python2_sitelib}/%{srcname}-%{version}-py?.?.egg-info %files -n python3-%{srcname} %{python3_sitelib}/ropgadget %{python3_sitelib}/%{srcname}-%{version}-py?.?.egg-info %{_bindir}/* - Remove the shebangs in %prep from: ropchain/arch/__init__.py ropchain/arch/ropmakerx64.py ropchain/arch/ropmakerx86.py See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks#Remove_shebang_from_Python_libraries Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 8 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-ROPGadget/review-python- ROPGadget/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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. [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. [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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [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 [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2-ROPGadget , python3-ROPGadget [?]: 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. [-]: %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 all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-ROPGadget-5.4-1.fc29.noarch.rpm python3-ROPGadget-5.4-1.fc29.noarch.rpm python-ROPGadget-5.4-1.fc29.src.rpm python2-ROPGadget.noarch: W: no-documentation python2-ROPGadget.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/__init__.py /usr/bin/env python2 python2-ROPGadget.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/__init__.py 644 /usr/bin/env python2 python2-ROPGadget.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx64.py /usr/bin/env python2 python2-ROPGadget.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx64.py 644 /usr/bin/env python2 python2-ROPGadget.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx86.py /usr/bin/env python2 python2-ROPGadget.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx86.py 644 /usr/bin/env python2 python2-ROPGadget.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ROPgadget python3-ROPGadget.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-ROPGadget.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/__init__.py /usr/bin/env python2 python3-ROPGadget.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/__init__.py 644 /usr/bin/env python2 python3-ROPGadget.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx64.py /usr/bin/env python2 python3-ROPGadget.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx64.py 644 /usr/bin/env python2 python3-ROPGadget.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx86.py /usr/bin/env python2 python3-ROPGadget.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/ropgadget/ropchain/arch/ropmakerx86.py 644 /usr/bin/env python2 python3-ROPGadget.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ROPgadget 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 12 errors, 4 warnings. -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/WN4VT5DXDHA46U6EPZPCLDPIA6TDOJKJ/
