https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809303 Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Full review done, see end of the long list for the summary. +:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing, na; Not Applicable MUST Items: [+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. alsa-sof-firmware-debug.noarch: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [=] MUST: 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 must be included in %license. LICENSE.* is currently part of %doc, this should be on a line of itself and marked as %license [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL: e89b333c01722cd9465dd49ebe98e26ecbecac3e29f4cd359555229ddb575bef sof-bin-72a04d5.tar.gz [+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. [+] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [na] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [na] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [=] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. Currently linux-firmware-whence is Required, but not linux-firmware itself, so /lib/firmware and /lib/firmware/intel are unowned directories. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file’s %files listings. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. [na] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [na] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [na] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [na] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency [na] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [na] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [+] MUST: Packages being added to the distribution MUST NOT depend on any packages which have been marked as being deprecated. SHOULD items: None of the should items from https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/ are applicable Summary, except for 3 minor issues this package is approved. Please fix these 3 issues before building the package: 1. The LICENSE.* files should be marked as %license instead of %doc, iow %files should look like this: %files %doc README* %license LICENCE* ... 2. Why is there a Requires: linux-firmware-whence ? That just provides the /usr/share/licenses/linux-firmware-whence/WHENCE file which I do not think alsa-sof-firmware depends on in any way? Please add a comment why this is Required, or drop the Requires. 3. The package neither owns; nor requires a package which owns, the /lib/firmware and /lib/firmware/intel dirs. Is that perhaps the purpose of the Requires: linux-firmware-whence ? In that case it should be Requires: linux-firmware, as it is the main linux-firmware package which owns those dirs. Or alternatively change %files to look like this: %files %doc README* %license LICENCE* %dir /lib/firmware %dir /lib/firmware/intel ... Note ideally we should not have 2 owners for a dir, so adding a "Requires: linux-firmware" (or replacing "Requires: linux-firmware-whence" with "Requires: linux-firmware") is preferred. -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
