[Bug 1836542] Review Request: studio-controls - Studio control for audio devices

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1836542

Lyes Saadi <fedora@xxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |fedora@xxxxxxx
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |fedora@xxxxxxx
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value
              Flags|                            |needinfo?(erich@ericheickme
                   |                            |yer.com)



--- Comment #1 from Lyes Saadi <fedora@xxxxxxx> ---
Hi! I hope I haven't missed anything! Thanks for your work :)!

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


Issues:
=======
- systemd_post is not invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and
  systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files.
  Note: Systemd service file(s) in studio-controls
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets
- systemd_user_post is not invoked in %post and systemd_user_preun in
  %preun for Systemd user units service files.
  Note: Systemd user unit service file(s) in studio-controls
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_units
- systemd services MUST NOT be started nor enabled after installation.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/Systemd/#_why_dont_we
  Look at presets for a default activation on installation:
  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/DefaultServices/
- Use systemd macros (%{_unitdir} and %{_userunitdir}) and add
  systemd-rpm-macros as a Build Requirement.
- Some missing requirements: A lot of commands used in the code are
  missing. I found (for now): dbus-tools, psmisc, polkit,
  pulseaudio-utils and jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients. This
  might not be exhaustive!
- Preserve timestamps using the "install" command or add the
  --preserve=mode,timestamps flag to "cp".
- Unowned directories. You should require polkit and own the systemd
  directories IMO.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership and
  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/UnownedDirectories/
- Please adjust the description so it doesn't exceed 80 characters per
  line.
- In the changelog, Tue May 07 2020 should be Thu May 07 2020 :P.

===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "GNU Lesser General Public License". 28
     files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /var/home/lyes/Documents/reviews/1836542-studio-
     controls/licensecheck.txt
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: It doesn't require polkit.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/systemd/user/indicator-
     messages.service.wants
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners:
     /usr/lib/systemd/user/indicator-messages.service.wants,
     /usr/share/polkit-1, /usr/lib/systemd/user/default.target.wants,
     /usr/share/polkit-1/actions
     See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
     guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership and
     https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
     guidelines/#_file_and_directory_ownership
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
     Note: There's a wrong date :P.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: 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).
     Note: Use %{_unitdir} and %{_userunitdir}.
[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.
     Note: "BuildRequires: systemd-rpm-macros" is missing.
     Note: A lot of other commands used in the code are missing as
     well. I found until now: dbus-tools, psmisc, polkit,
     pulseaudio-utils, jack-audio-connection-kit-example-clients... This
     is not exhaustive!
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 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]: 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 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

===== 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[!]: 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: studio-controls-1.99.1-1.fc33.noarch.rpm
          studio-controls-1.99.1-1.fc33.src.rpm
studio-controls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jackdbus ->
jackdaws
studio-controls.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C privilege for users and
controls jackdbus. It allows Jackdbus to be run from session start. It also
will detect USB audio devices getting plugged in after session start and
optionally connect them to jackdbus as a client or switch them in as jackdbus
master.
studio-controls.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jackdbus ->
jackdaws
studio-controls.src: E: description-line-too-long C privilege for users and
controls jackdbus. It allows Jackdbus to be run from session start. It also
will detect USB audio devices getting plugged in after session start and
optionally connect them to jackdbus as a client or switch them in as jackdbus
master.
studio-controls.src:43: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib
studio-controls.src: E: specfile-error warning: bogus date in %changelog: Tue
May 07 2020 Erich Eickmeyer <erich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 1.99.0-1
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
studio-controls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jackdbus ->
jackdaws
studio-controls.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C privilege for users and
controls jackdbus. It allows Jackdbus to be run from session start. It also
will detect USB audio devices getting plugged in after session start and
optionally connect them to jackdbus as a client or switch them in as jackdbus
master.
studio-controls.noarch: W: invalid-url URL:
https://launchpad.net/ubuntustudio-controls <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or
service not known>
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 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://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




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux