https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2275304 Miroslav Suchý <msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags|needinfo?(msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx |fedora-review? |) | --- Comment #10 from Miroslav Suchý <msuchy@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Permissions on files are set properly. Note: See rpmlint output See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_file_permissions - 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 LICENSE-SELECT2.md is not marked as %license See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text - systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in osh-worker, osh-hub See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets - license file must be installed - there is no owner of /etc/osh directory Should: - note that usually the order of section is %prep, %build, %install, all scriptlet, all %files section. Your style of mixing %files and scriptlets make it hard for me to read the spec file. - when using tarball from GH then you should specify full URL in URL tag. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/#_tag_example - the tarball has test, can it be run in %check? - instead of cp -R you want to use cp -aR (and I think the R is not needed at all). ===== MUST items ===== 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. [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/osh [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. [-]: 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. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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]: 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 Python: [-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?) [-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files ===== 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [!]: 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: [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 warning - and I removed all that are not relevant. But these remaining should be addressed: osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: python-bytecode-without-source /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.opt-1.pyc osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: python-bytecode-without-source /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.pyc osh-worker.noarch: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/sbin/osh-worker 754 osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: E: non-readable /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.opt-1.pyc 640 osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: E: non-readable /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.pyc 640 osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: E: non-readable /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.cpython-312.opt-1.pyc 640 osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: E: non-readable /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.cpython-312.pyc 640 osh-hub.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/scripts/osh-xmlrpc-client.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3 osh-hub.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/scripts/umb-emit.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3 osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: non-etc-or-var-file-marked-as-conffile /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.opt-1.pyc osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: non-etc-or-var-file-marked-as-conffile /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.pyc osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: non-etc-or-var-file-marked-as-conffile /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.cpython-312.opt-1.pyc osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: non-etc-or-var-file-marked-as-conffile /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.cpython-312.pyc osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: non-etc-or-var-file-marked-as-conffile /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/settings_local.py osh-client.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary covscan osh-client.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary osh-cli osh-hub.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary osh-retention osh-hub.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary osh-stats osh-worker.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary osh-worker osh-client.noarch: W: no-documentation osh-common.noarch: W: no-documentation osh-hub.noarch: W: no-documentation osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation osh-worker.noarch: W: no-documentation osh-worker-conf-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation osh-hub.noarch: W: log-files-without-logrotate ['/var/log/osh'] osh-worker.noarch: W: log-files-without-logrotate ['/var/log/osh'] osh.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: openscanhub-1.0.0.20240419.115116.g843b9dd.tar.gz osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: E: hardlink-across-config-files /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.pyc /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.ci.cpython-312.opt-1.pyc osh-hub-conf-devel.noarch: E: hardlink-across-config-files /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.cpython-312.pyc /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/__pycache__/settings_local.cpython-312.opt-1.pyc osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/Add2_32.png /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static-assets/Add2_32.png osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/Add_32.png /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static-assets/Add_32.png osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/Document_content_32.png /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static-assets/Document_content_32.png osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/Message_log_32.png /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static-assets/Message_log_32.png osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/Ok_32.png /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static-assets/Ok_32.png osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/Warning_32.png /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static-assets/Warning_32.png osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/css/redhat.css /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static-assets/css/redhat.css osh-hub.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/admin/js/vendor/select2/LICENSE.md /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/osh/hub/static/admin/css/vendor/select2/LICENSE-SELECT2.md osh-hub.noarch: W: empty-%postun -- 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=2275304 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202275304%23c10 -- _______________________________________________ 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
