https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1596355 Vasiliy Glazov <vascom2@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Vasiliy Glazov <vascom2@xxxxxxxxx> --- Package approved. Please check: 1. gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. 2. Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)" Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in piper See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache ===== 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: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 38 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/vascom/1596355-piper/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [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. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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]: 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [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 [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: 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). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [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]: 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) [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Rpmlint ------- Checking: piper-0.2.900-1.20180214git5f6ed20.fc29.noarch.rpm piper-0.2.900-1.20180214git5f6ed20.fc29.src.rpm piper.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libratbag -> lib ratbag, lib-ratbag, calibrate piper.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ratbagd -> ratbags, ratbag, ratbag d piper.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary piper piper.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libratbag -> lib ratbag, lib-ratbag, calibrate piper.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ratbagd -> ratbags, ratbag, ratbag d 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory piper.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libratbag -> lib ratbag, lib-ratbag, calibrate piper.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ratbagd -> ratbags, ratbag, ratbag d piper.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/libratbag/piper <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> piper.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary piper 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/vascom/1596355-piper/srpm/piper.spec 2018-06-29 09:26:53.330329300 +0300 +++ /home/vascom/1596355-piper/srpm-unpacked/piper.spec 2018-06-28 19:41:54.000000000 +0300 @@ -21,6 +21,4 @@ BuildRequires: meson -Requires: hicolor-icon-theme - %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{name}} Requires -------- piper (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) Provides -------- piper: application() application(org.freedesktop.Piper.desktop) piper Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/libratbag/piper/archive/5f6ed202a57c64c9dcd614006aa0e16d49449c76.tar.gz#/piper-5f6ed20.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d08313d088d68b37e55d85f510ec0e6a20edabd6d96af668b44e7fb105050a00 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d08313d088d68b37e55d85f510ec0e6a20edabd6d96af668b44e7fb105050a00 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1596355 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, 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 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/W4N3N7X2ROWDVJR24YOEM2TJC4Z6IUW3/
