https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1878350 --- Comment #1 from Andy Mender <andymenderunix@xxxxxxxxx> --- > %files indicator > %{_bindir}/%{name}-indicator > %{_datadir}/applications/%{name}-indicator.desktop > %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/%{name}-status-*.svg > %{_metainfodir}/%{name}-indicator.appdata.xml > %{_userunitdir}/%{name}-indicator.service > %{python3_sitelib}/%{name}_indicator/ If the gammastep-indicator subpackage is a regular Python package, it should (if possible) provide egg-info like so: > %{python3_sitelib}/gammastep-indicator-%{version}-py%{python3_version}.egg-info/ Please, ignore this comment if that's not the case :). Full review below. There are quite some extra warnings from fedora-review, but some of them might be noise. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - systemd_user_post is invoked in %post and systemd_user_preun in %preun for Systemd user units service files. Note: Systemd user unit service file(s) in gammastep, gammastep-indicator See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_units ===== 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]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [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", "*No copyright* GPL (v3)", "NTP License (legal disclaimer)". 110 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/gammastep/copr- build-1651081/review-gammastep/licensecheck.txt Review: The src/gamma-control.xml file has an extra in-code legal disclaimer that resembles the MIT license. Please, have a look at it. [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. Review: since the gammastep-indicator subpackage does not explicitly Requires the main gammastep package, one should add the license file to it as well. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/systemd/user, /usr/lib/systemd Review: please, make gammastep own these dirs or add the necessary Requires. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [?]: 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. [-]: 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]: 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 20480 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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]: 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: [ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [ ]: 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 [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag Note: Could not download Source0: https://gitlab.com/chinstrap/gammastep/-/archive/v2.0.2/gammastep-v2.0.2.tar.gz See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/SourceURL/ Review: Some route redirection issue in fedora-review? The URL is perfectly accessible. [-]: 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in gammastep-indicator Review: Is the gammastep-indicator subpackage an independent subpackage? [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments Review: everything in order. [-]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment. See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [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: gammastep-2.0.2-0.1.fc34.x86_64.rpm gammastep-indicator-2.0.2-0.1.fc34.x86_64.rpm gammastep-debuginfo-2.0.2-0.1.fc34.x86_64.rpm gammastep-debugsource-2.0.2-0.1.fc34.x86_64.rpm gammastep-2.0.2-0.1.fc34.src.rpm gammastep.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wlr -> war, SLR gammastep.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wlroots -> roots gammastep-indicator.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libappindicator-gtk3 gammastep-indicator.x86_64: W: no-documentation gammastep-indicator.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gammastep-indicator gammastep.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wlr -> war, SLR gammastep.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wlroots -> roots 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: gammastep-debuginfo-2.0.2-0.1.fc34.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: no installed packages by name gammastep (none): E: no installed packages by name gammastep-debugsource (none): E: no installed packages by name gammastep-debuginfo (none): E: no installed packages by name gammastep-indicator 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Requires -------- gammastep (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh hicolor-icon-theme libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXxf86vm.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libdrm.so.2()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libwayland-client.so.0()(64bit) libxcb-randr.so.0()(64bit) libxcb.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) gammastep-indicator (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/python3 gtk3 libappindicator-gtk3 python(abi) python3dist(pygobject) python3dist(pyxdg) gammastep-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gammastep-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- gammastep: application() application(gammastep.desktop) gammastep gammastep(x86-64) gammastep-indicator: application() application(gammastep-indicator.desktop) gammastep-indicator gammastep-indicator(x86-64) metainfo() metainfo(gammastep-indicator.appdata.xml) gammastep-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) gammastep-debuginfo gammastep-debuginfo(x86-64) gammastep-debugsource: gammastep-debugsource gammastep-debugsource(x86-64) AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found ------------------------------ AC_PROG_LIBTOOL found in: gammastep-v2.0.2/configure.ac:15 -- 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
