[Bug 2122395] Review Request: roc-toolkit - Real-time audio streaming

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2122395

Petr Menšík <pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx
             Status|NEW                         |POST
                 CC|                            |pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx



--- Comment #1 from Petr Menšík <pemensik@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
Package Review
==============

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


Issues:
=======
- 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.
  Note: License file licensing.rst.txt is not marked as %license
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text
- New packages should use SPDX License identifiers, they are not used here.
- Not the latest release is packaged. A reason for that is not documented
  and does not provide link to upstream issue, where it might request a new
release.
- src/tests exist in source archive, but no test exist in build. Please try to
use
  some test. If it is not possible, document it in spec file.


===== 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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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", "*No copyright* Mozilla Public License
     2.0", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "GNU Lesser
     General Public License v2.1 or later", "Mozilla Public License 2.0",
     "*No copyright* Mozilla Public License 2.0 GNU Lesser General Public
     License, Version 2.1". 150 files have unknown license. Detailed output
     of licensecheck in /home/pemensik/fedora/rawhide/2122395-roc-
     toolkit/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[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.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: 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:
[x]: 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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[!]: 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.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[!]: %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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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:
[!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
     Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 14438400 bytes in /usr/share roc-
     toolkit-doc-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm:14387200
     See:
    
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_Guidelines
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:



Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.2.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 6

roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/.dwz/roc-toolkit-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-conv-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-recv-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-send-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: statically-linked-binary
/usr/lib/debug/.dwz/roc-toolkit-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64
roc-toolkit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
roc-toolkit-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-documentation
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: missing-PT_GNU_STACK-section
/usr/lib/debug/.dwz/roc-toolkit-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: ldd-failed
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-conv-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug
/usr/bin/bash: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8)
ldd: warning: you do not have execution permission for
`/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-conv-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug'

roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: ldd-failed
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-recv-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug
/usr/bin/bash: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8)
ldd: warning: you do not have execution permission for
`/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-recv-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug'

roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: E: ldd-failed
/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-send-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug
/usr/bin/bash: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8)
ldd: warning: you do not have execution permission for
`/usr/lib/debug/usr/bin/roc-send-0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38.x86_64.debug'

roc-toolkit-utils.x86_64: W: invalid-license MPLv2.0
roc-toolkit-utils.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2
roc-toolkit-utils.x86_64: W: invalid-license CeCILL-C
roc-toolkit-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license MPLv2.0
roc-toolkit-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2
roc-toolkit-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license CeCILL-C
roc-toolkit-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license MPLv2.0
roc-toolkit-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2
roc-toolkit-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license CeCILL-C
roc-toolkit-doc.x86_64: W: invalid-license MPLv2.0
roc-toolkit-doc.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2
roc-toolkit-doc.x86_64: W: invalid-license CeCILL-C
roc-toolkit.x86_64: W: invalid-license MPLv2.0
roc-toolkit.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2
roc-toolkit.x86_64: W: invalid-license CeCILL-C
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license MPLv2.0
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license CeCILL-C
roc-toolkit.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1.5-1
['0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1.fc38', '0.1.5^20220829git863a0227-1']
roc-toolkit-doc.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/roc-toolkit-doc/html/docs/.buildinfo
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/debug/.dwz
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/debug/.dwz
roc-toolkit-doc.x86_64: W: files-duplicate
/usr/share/doc/roc-toolkit-doc/html/doxygen/search/functions_16.js
/usr/share/doc/roc-toolkit-doc/html/doxygen/search/all_17.js
roc-toolkit-doc.x86_64: W: files-duplicate
/usr/share/doc/roc-toolkit-doc/html/doxygen/search/functions_9.js
/usr/share/doc/roc-toolkit-doc/html/doxygen/search/all_9.js
roc-toolkit-doc.x86_64: W: files-duplicate
/usr/share/doc/roc-toolkit-doc/html/doxygen/search/functions_a.js
/usr/share/doc/roc-toolkit-doc/html/doxygen/search/all_a.js
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/19/eef3f7a4b08e68398044563bc3c8832b1cdc42
../../../.build-id/19/eef3f7a4b08e68398044563bc3c8832b1cdc42
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/2a/7db8898812df78635062e6f8e3f5ffa9036e18
../../../.build-id/2a/7db8898812df78635062e6f8e3f5ffa9036e18
roc-toolkit-utils-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/98/3263e62edc3c02b7bb07ac53c9c721336a2fc2
../../../.build-id/98/3263e62edc3c02b7bb07ac53c9c721336a2fc2
 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 35 warnings, 5 badness; has
taken 1.2 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/roc-streaming/roc-toolkit/archive/863a0227b78464c3a56fc0484bec73c891e4b7a8/roc-toolkit-20220829git863a0227.tar.gz
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
f3daefff21cd2aece97be9c9646a2fdc39ad415bf192cefddc19b5673e300f72
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
f3daefff21cd2aece97be9c9646a2fdc39ad415bf192cefddc19b5673e300f72


Requires
--------
roc-toolkit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libopenfec.so.1()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libunwind.so.8()(64bit)
    libuv.so.1()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

roc-toolkit-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libroc.so.0.1()(64bit)
    roc-toolkit(x86-64)

roc-toolkit-utils (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libopenfec.so.1()(64bit)
    libpulse.so.0()(64bit)
    libpulse.so.0(PULSE_0)(64bit)
    libsox.so.3()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libunwind.so.8()(64bit)
    libuv.so.1()(64bit)
    roc-toolkit(x86-64)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

roc-toolkit-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

roc-toolkit-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
roc-toolkit:
    libroc.so.0.1()(64bit)
    libroc.so.0.1(ROC)(64bit)
    roc-toolkit
    roc-toolkit(x86-64)

roc-toolkit-devel:
    roc-toolkit-devel
    roc-toolkit-devel(x86-64)

roc-toolkit-utils:
    roc-toolkit-utils
    roc-toolkit-utils(x86-64)

roc-toolkit-doc:
    roc-toolkit-doc
    roc-toolkit-doc(x86-64)

roc-toolkit-debugsource:
    roc-toolkit-debugsource
    roc-toolkit-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2122395
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: Python, R, PHP, Java, fonts, Ocaml, Haskell, SugarActivity,
Perl
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2122395
_______________________________________________
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




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

  Powered by Linux