https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1734558 Vitaly Zaitsev <vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Vitaly Zaitsev <vitaly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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]: 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. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [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 40960 bytes in 3 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]: 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 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]: 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]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?) [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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files ===== 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]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [x]: 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. [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: [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: apostrophe-2.2.0.1-1.fc33.noarch.rpm apostrophe-2.2.0.1-1.fc33.src.rpm apostrophe.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency glib2 apostrophe.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pandoc -> pan doc, pan-doc, panda apostrophe.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/.pylintrc apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/bparser.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/bwriter.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/customization.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/latexenc.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/fuzzywuzzy/StringMatcher.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/fuzzywuzzy/fuzz.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/fuzzywuzzy/process.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary apostrophe apostrophe.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pandoc -> pan doc, pan-doc, panda 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- apostrophe.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency glib2 apostrophe.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pandoc -> pan doc, pan-doc, panda apostrophe.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://gitlab.gnome.org/somas/apostrophe <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> apostrophe.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/.pylintrc apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/bparser.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/bwriter.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/customization.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/bibtexparser/latexenc.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/fuzzywuzzy/StringMatcher.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/fuzzywuzzy/fuzz.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/apostrophe/plugins/bibtex/fuzzywuzzy/process.py 644 /usr/bin/env python apostrophe.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary apostrophe 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 4 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://gitlab.gnome.org/somas/apostrophe/-/archive/2.2.0.1/apostrophe-2.2.0.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ead3818491c932684d30a53bc21ae30d44d17a91c8a8e23d1eb629affef6e8fe CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ead3818491c932684d30a53bc21ae30d44d17a91c8a8e23d1eb629affef6e8fe Requires -------- apostrophe (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 glib2 hicolor-icon-theme python(abi) python3-Levenshtein python3-cairo python3-enchant python3-pypandoc Provides -------- apostrophe: apostrophe application() application(org.gnome.gitlab.somas.Apostrophe.desktop) metainfo() metainfo(org.gnome.gitlab.somas.Apostrophe.appdata.xml) mimehandler(text/plain) mimehandler(text/x-markdown) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1734558 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api Disabled plugins: R, Haskell, Perl, Ocaml, PHP, C/C++, Java, SugarActivity, fonts 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
