[Bug 1410992] Review Request: git-phab - Git subcommand to integrate with phabricator

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1410992

soumilkadam@xxxxxxxxx changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |soumilkadam@xxxxxxxxx



--- Comment #3 from soumilkadam@xxxxxxxxx ---
Package Review
==============

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


Issues:
=======
- Package installs properly.
  Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/


===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License, Version
     2", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "*No copyright* GNU
     General Public License". 8 files have unknown license. Detailed output
     of licensecheck in /home/soumil/1410992-git-phab/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[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 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[ ]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
     Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[ ]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: 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]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: Mock build failed
     See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
     guidelines/#_use_rpmlint
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Installation errors
-------------------
INFO: mock.py version 3.3 starting (python version = 3.10.8, NVR =
mock-3.3-1.fc36)...
Start(bootstrap): init plugins
INFO: selinux enabled
Finish(bootstrap): init plugins
Start: init plugins
INFO: selinux enabled
Finish: init plugins
INFO: Signal handler active
Start: run
Start(bootstrap): chroot init
INFO: calling preinit hooks
INFO: enabled root cache
INFO: enabled package manager cache
Start(bootstrap): cleaning package manager metadata
Finish(bootstrap): cleaning package manager metadata
INFO: enabled HW Info plugin
Mock Version: 3.3
INFO: Mock Version: 3.3
Finish(bootstrap): chroot init
Start: chroot init
INFO: calling preinit hooks
INFO: enabled root cache
INFO: enabled package manager cache
Start: cleaning package manager metadata
Finish: cleaning package manager metadata
INFO: enabled HW Info plugin
Mock Version: 3.3
INFO: Mock Version: 3.3
Finish: chroot init
INFO: installing package(s): /builddir/git-phab-2.0.0-1.fc38.noarch.rpm
ERROR: Command failed: 
 # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 5a5038bac3eb4d4cb851e01e8bd2a620 -D
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64-bootstrap/root -a --capability=cap_ipc_lock
--bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.g9qfq273:/etc/resolv.conf --console=pipe
--setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash
--setenv=HOME=/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/installation-homedir
--setenv=HOSTNAME=mock --setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin
--setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf "\033]0;<mock-chroot>\007"
--setenv=PS1=<mock-chroot> \s-\v\$  --setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8
--setenv=LC_MESSAGES=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off /usr/bin/dnf --installroot
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 38
--setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local
--disableplugin=spacewalk --disableplugin=versionlock install
/builddir/git-phab-2.0.0-1.fc38.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts



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


Requires
--------
git-phab (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    python(abi)
    python3-GitPython
    python3-appdirs
    python3-argcomplete
    python3-phabricator
    python3.11dist(appdirs)
    python3.11dist(argcomplete)
    python3.11dist(gitpython)
    python3.11dist(phabricator)



Provides
--------
git-phab:
    git-phab
    python3.11dist(git-phab)
    python3dist(git-phab)



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1410992
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: fonts, Java, Haskell, SugarActivity, PHP, Python, R, Perl,
Ocaml, C/C++
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=1410992
_______________________________________________
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