[Bug 1924918] Review Request: reprotest: Build packages and check them for reproducibility

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1924918

Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |POST
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+



--- Comment #8 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> ---
You added the signature file, but it's not used for anything…

Please add URL: field with a link to the upstream project home page.

Is glibc-all-langpacks really necessary? That's a lot of data. 

+ package name is OK
+ license is acceptable (GPLv3+)
+ license is specified correctly
+ builds and installs OK
+ R/P/BR look OK

rpmlint:
rpmlint reprotest-0.7.16-3.fc34.noarch.rpm reprotest-0.7.16-3.fc34.src.rpm
reprotest.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) reproducibility ->
reprehensibility (nice one ;))
reprotest.noarch: W: no-url-tag (see above)
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/VirtSubproc.py
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/adt_testbed.py
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/adtlog.py
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/__init__.py
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/arch.py
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/debian.py
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/lib/system_interface/guix.py
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-chroot
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-lxc
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-lxd
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-null
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-qemu
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-schroot
reprotest.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/reprotest/virt/autopkgtest-virt-ssh
reprotest.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary reprotest
Hmm, IIRC, Debian requires a man page for every package, so there should be one
somewhere. Please also add it here if possible.

2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 12 warnings.

Package is APPROVED.

Please note that the spec file in dist-git is the canonical version.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_spec_maintenance_and_canonicity
says:
> Maintainers MUST expect that other maintainers and automated tooling will make changes to their packages,
> potentially without communicating prior to doing so (though communication is always encouraged). If some
> maintainers are also attempting to keep copies of a spec in an outside repository, they MUST be prepared
> to merge changes made to the spec in Fedora’s repository, and MUST NOT overwrite those changes with a
> copy from an external repository

i.e. if you want to keep the spec file in the upstream project, that is OK, but
occasionally you'll need
to move stuff manually to the version in upstream.


-- 
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




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

  Powered by Linux