https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2213078 Felix Kaechele <felix@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(topazus@outlook.c | |om) --- Comment #3 from Felix Kaechele <felix@xxxxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== ===== List of Issues ===== - Licensing: License tags for bundled JavaScript libraries missing. They need to be added if the bundling is necessary and continued. See note about bundled libraries below. - Package conflicts with files from goldendict but doesn't specify a Conflicts tag. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Conflicts/ for details on the process. - Package bundles: - qtsingleapplication - No justification given in spec file - Upstream references deprecated https://gitorious.org/qt-solutions/qt-solutions as source instead of canonical upstream https://github.com/qtproject/qt-solutions - Packaged in Fedora but would need a build against Qt6. For that this patch would need to be applied: https://github.com/qtproject/qt-solutions/commit/2fb541ecaf76c8592855ec86801ea58f87b4d58d Suggestion: File bug against Fedora component qtsingleapplication, then unbundle and use system library. - Only relevant if not being unbundled: - Provides tag is present, but misspelled ("boundles" instead of "bundles"). - Provides tag is unversioned, qtsingleapplication upstream seems to have stopped increasing the version. A git tag could be used if it can be identified which git commit was used to create the bundled sources. - JavaScript libraries (see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/JavaScript/): - Dark Reader v4.9.58 MIT Licensed File: src/scripts/darkreader.js - iFrame Resizer - v4.3.2 - 2021-10-18 MIT Licensed File: src/scripts/iframeResizer.contentWindow.min.js src/scripts/iframeResizer.min.js - jQuery v3.6.0 MIT Licensed File: src/scripts/jquery-3.6.0.slim.min.js - Package uses an ExclusiveArch tag for reasons related to qt6-webengine, this is permissible from my perspective but the approach mentioned in the referenced specfile could be used (BuildRequires qt6-srpm-macros and use %qt6_qtwebengine_arches macro). Your call. - CMake uses pkg-config to identify the library devel packages to install. The spec file should therefor express library dependencies in that way: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/PkgConfigBuildRequires/ This has the added benefit that the package will build even when the user has ffmpeg installed through a third-party repository, which may conflict with ffmpeg-free-devel. - rpmlint warning: unused-direct-shlib-dependency could be fixed by patching the CMake files to pass the as-needed flag for the fmt library, see https://stackoverflow.com/a/65819681 (this patch should be suggested upstream) - rpmlint warning: no-manual-page-for-binary is permissible for GUI applications in my opinion. ===== Optional Suggestions ===== - Consider sorting the different BuildRequires blocks alphabetically Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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. [!]: 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 v3.0 or later", "*No copyright* Public domain", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License v3.0 or later", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "GNU General Public License v1.0 or later", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "GNU General Public License, Version 3", "BSD 0-Clause License", "MIT License", "BSD 3-Clause License". 599 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fkaechel/review/2213078-goldendict-ng/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/goldendict(goldendict), /usr/share/goldendict/locale(goldendict) [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [-]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. [!]: 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. [!]: 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 20480 bytes in 1 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]: 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [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: [-]: 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. [x]: 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. [-]: %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]: 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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [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 5171200 bytes in /usr/share [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: goldendict-ng-23.06.01-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm goldendict-ng-debuginfo-23.06.01-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm goldendict-ng-debugsource-23.06.01-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm goldendict-ng-23.06.01-1.fc39.src.rpm ============================================================================================== rpmlint session starts ============================================================================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp23b7xlkb')] checks: 31, packages: 4 goldendict-ng.spec:53: W: unversioned-explicit-provides boundled(qtsingleapplication) goldendict-ng.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary goldendict =============================================================== 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 1.7 s =============================================================== Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: goldendict-ng-debuginfo-23.06.01-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm ============================================================================================== rpmlint session starts ============================================================================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmppnmeg_o1')] checks: 31, packages: 1 =============================================================== 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.8 s =============================================================== Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 3 goldendict-ng.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/bin/goldendict /lib64/libfmt.so.9 goldendict-ng.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary goldendict 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 1.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/xiaoyifang/goldendict-ng/archive/v23.06.01/goldendict-ng-23.06.01.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0aabbe6acb4f1f9f9b95d77066b9823a86647a7c0c58a85c04b86a246fc9429b CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0aabbe6acb4f1f9f9b95d77066b9823a86647a7c0c58a85c04b86a246fc9429b Requires -------- goldendict-ng (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): glibc libQt6Core.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6.5)(64bit) libQt6Core5Compat.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Core5Compat.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Gui.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Gui.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Multimedia.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Multimedia.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Network.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Network.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6PrintSupport.so.6()(64bit) libQt6PrintSupport.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Svg.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Svg.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6TextToSpeech.so.6()(64bit) libQt6TextToSpeech.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6WebChannel.so.6()(64bit) libQt6WebChannel.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6WebEngineCore.so.6()(64bit) libQt6WebEngineCore.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6WebEngineWidgets.so.6()(64bit) libQt6WebEngineWidgets.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Widgets.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Widgets.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Xml.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Xml.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXtst.so.6()(64bit) libavcodec.so.60()(64bit) libavcodec.so.60(LIBAVCODEC_60)(64bit) libavformat.so.60()(64bit) libavformat.so.60(LIBAVFORMAT_60)(64bit) libavutil.so.58()(64bit) libavutil.so.58(LIBAVUTIL_58)(64bit) libbz2.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libeb.so.16()(64bit) libfmt.so.9()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libhunspell-1.7.so.0()(64bit) liblzma.so.5()(64bit) liblzma.so.5(XZ_5.0)(64bit) liblzo2.so.2()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libopencc.so.1.1()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.13)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) libswresample.so.4()(64bit) libswresample.so.4(LIBSWRESAMPLE_4)(64bit) libtomlplusplus.so.3()(64bit) libvorbisfile.so.3()(64bit) libxapian.so.30()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.0)(64bit) libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.0.2)(64bit) libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.2.3)(64bit) libzim.so.8()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) goldendict-ng-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): goldendict-ng-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- goldendict-ng: application() application(org.xiaoyifang.GoldenDict_NG.desktop) boundled(qtsingleapplication) goldendict-ng goldendict-ng(x86-64) metainfo() metainfo(org.xiaoyifang.GoldenDict_NG.metainfo.xml) mimehandler(x-scheme-handler/dict) mimehandler(x-scheme-handler/goldendict) goldendict-ng-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) goldendict-ng-debuginfo goldendict-ng-debuginfo(x86-64) goldendict-ng-debugsource: goldendict-ng-debugsource goldendict-ng-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2213078 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Haskell, Perl, Java, fonts, Ocaml, PHP, SugarActivity, Python, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2213078 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202213078%23c3 _______________________________________________ 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
