https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2110055 Carl George 🤠 <carl@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |carl@xxxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |carl@xxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Carl George 🤠 <carl@xxxxxxxxxx> --- rpmlint is complaining about the summary being too long, ending with a dot, and repeating the package name. The guidelines say the description should be wrapped at 80 characters, and I believe rpmlint wants to see the summary capped to that as well. I suggest using the snippet from the sidebar in GitHub. -Summary: 6tunnel allows you to use services provided by IPv6 hosts with IPv4-only applications and vice-versa. +Summary: Tunnelling for application that don't speak IPv6 https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_summary_and_description ================================================================================ New packages since July must use SPDX identifiers. -License: GPLv2 +License: GPL-2.0-only https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_valid_license_short_names ================================================================================ We don't really have autotools docs, but it's fairly well established that we should use the force flag with autoreconf to overwrite any generated files that may be included in the upstream tarball (such as install-sh in this case). A quick grep through all rawhide spec files shows me 729 instances with the force flag, and 170 without it. -autoreconf --install +autoreconf -vif ================================================================================ The %configure macro already sets the prefix, so it's redundant to specify it again. -%configure --prefix=%{_prefix} +%configure https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/rpm-4.17.1-release/macros.in#L982 ================================================================================ 6tunnel.x86_64: E: missing-call-to-setgroups-before-setuid /usr/bin/6tunnel This one isn't a blocker for the review, but you may consider discussing it with upstream to see if they have ideas about changes in the source code to address it. I found one discussion post about reversing the order of setuid/setgid calls. https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/rpmlint-missing-call-to-setgroups-before-setuid/5037 ================================================================================ 6tunnel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/6tunnel/COPYING This one isn't a blocker for the review, but please open an issue upstream to request they update the FSF address in their COPYING file. https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/rpm-4.17.1-release/macros.in#L982 ================================================================================ 6tunnel.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1.1-1 ['0.13-1.fc38', '0.13-1'] It looks like you may have copied a changelog entry from a template or another package. Changing 0.1.1 to 0.13 should be enough to resolve this warning. ================================================================================ I don't see a %check section, but the tarball includes a test.py script. At a quick glance I think this does everything on localhost, so in theory it could work to run it in %check. Not a blocker but worth adding if you can get it sorted. -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2110055 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
