https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1813563 --- Comment #3 from Antonio T. (sagitter) <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - LICENSE file reports a GPLv3 - incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.3-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc ['1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33', '1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc'] - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/sagitter/1813563-libpasraw/diff.txt See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ - Please, create a devel subpackage and include an symbolic link `libpasraw.so` pointed to `libpasraw.so.1.1` The source code should generate/include header files too, and installed together the unversioned library. Ask to upstream. - Use the patch to not install anything under `share/doc/libpasraw`, use only %doc to mark the documentation files. - Linker flags are not used; use a patch like that attached and set the LDLAGS. - This package provides a library earlier included in `libpasastro-1.2.*`; i guess it's better this way: new `libpasastro = 1.3.0-1` must BuildRequires: libpasraw-devel >= 0:1.3.0-1 Requires: libpasraw%{?_isa} >= 0:1.3.0-1 meanwhile, `libpasraw = 1.3.0-1` will be always installed because needed by new `libpasastro >= 1.3.0-1`, so it won't be ever **in conflict** with `libpasastro < 1.3.0-1` because they're never installed at the same time. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 43 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1813563-libpasraw/licensecheck.txt [?]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [!]: 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. [!]: 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. [?]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 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]: 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages. [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]: 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 ===== 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. [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [?]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [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 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: libpasraw-1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33.x86_64.rpm libpasraw-debuginfo-1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33.x86_64.rpm libpasraw-debugsource-1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33.x86_64.rpm libpasraw-1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33.src.rpm libpasraw.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libraw -> lib raw, lib-raw, library libpasraw.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libraw -> lib raw, lib-raw, library libpasraw.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.3-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc ['1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33', '1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc'] libpasraw.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ HTTP Error 404: Not Found libpasraw-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ HTTP Error 404: Not Found libpasraw-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ HTTP Error 404: Not Found libpasraw.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libraw -> lib raw, lib-raw, library libpasraw.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libraw -> lib raw, lib-raw, library libpasraw.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ HTTP Error 404: Not Found 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: libpasraw-debuginfo-1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33.x86_64.rpm libpasraw-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "en_US.UTF-8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "en_US.UTF-8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). libpasraw-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> libpasraw-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> libpasraw.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libraw -> lib raw, lib-raw, library libpasraw.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libraw -> lib raw, lib-raw, library libpasraw.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.3-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc ['1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc.fc33', '1.3.0-1.20200302gitdbbe4cc'] libpasraw.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/libpasraw/ <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> libpasraw.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpasraw.so.1.1 /lib64/libstdc++.so.6 libpasraw.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpasraw.so.1.1 /lib64/libm.so.6 libpasraw.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpasraw.so.1.1 /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/pchev/libpasraw/archive/dbbe4ccc717f9aed4efd0841ceb88a5825c3463d/libpasraw-1.3.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 108a324450932fb8c6c84193e8bb3b45c6b3db9e7b757acf986c33d0b4ddf40c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ea9b5880398177e769c163a055fc42842bf9190150a3afc8d6cc872380821d69 diff -r also reports differences Requires -------- libpasraw (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libraw.so.19()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) libpasraw-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libpasraw-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- libpasraw: libpasraw libpasraw(x86-64) libpasraw.so.1()(64bit) libpasraw-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) libpasraw-debuginfo libpasraw-debuginfo(x86-64) libpasraw-debugsource: libpasraw-debugsource libpasraw-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1813563 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Ocaml, Perl, PHP, R, fonts, SugarActivity, Python, Haskell, Java Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- 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
