https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1879544 Qiyu Yan <yanqiyu01@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |yanqiyu01@xxxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |yanqiyu01@xxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Qiyu Yan <yanqiyu01@xxxxxxxxx> --- Personally I suggest make the version of pinyin-data as a macro to make update easiler Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/doc/golang-github-mozillazg- pinyin-devel/README.md See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_duplicate_files // Should be fixed by removing duplicate files in %godoc macro or in %files part? - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 2908160 bytes in 11 files. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_documentation // see below, I guess some data are packaged as doc ===== 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. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/yan/review/1879544-golang-github-mozillazg- pinyin/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: // emitted some golang packages, since golang macros did the directories owning [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. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [?]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. // in doubt, txt files in mozillazg/pinyin-data seems to be data files, while they went to %doc [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. [-]: 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. [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 requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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]: 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in golang- github-mozillazg-pinyin-devel [?]: 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. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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: golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-0.18.0-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-devel-0.18.0-1.fc34.noarch.rpm golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-0.18.0-1.fc34.src.rpm golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin.x86_64: E: shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/bin/_tools golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin.x86_64: E: shared-lib-without-dependency-information /usr/bin/pinyin // I think rpmlint isn't working well with golang bins golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary _tools golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pinyin golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/gocode/src/github.com/mozillazg/go-pinyin/.goipath // Fine, seen in all golang-* pacakges 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-debuginfo-0.18.0-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: no installed packages by name golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin (none): E: no installed packages by name golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-devel (none): E: no installed packages by name golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-debuginfo 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/mozillazg/pinyin-data/archive/v0.9.0.tar.gz#/pinyin-data-0.9.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e8965dcfa719f3edf14fd24911505ee8da41f64acfef8a93d7fa27c31c81fe14 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e8965dcfa719f3edf14fd24911505ee8da41f64acfef8a93d7fa27c31c81fe14 https://github.com/mozillazg/go-pinyin/archive/v0.18.0/go-pinyin-0.18.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0cf2b06b2a16ae9e8ac0d99f14316f47834fc762799e0170039717ec2263b88d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0cf2b06b2a16ae9e8ac0d99f14316f47834fc762799e0170039717ec2263b88d Requires -------- golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): go-filesystem golang(github.com/mattn/go-isatty) Provides -------- golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin: golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin(x86-64) golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-devel: golang(github.com/mozillazg/go-pinyin) golang-github-mozillazg-pinyin-devel golang-ipath(github.com/mozillazg/go-pinyin) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1879544 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: PHP, Python, Perl, R, Java, SugarActivity, Haskell, Ocaml, C/C++, 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
