[Bug 2277254] Review Request: unison - Unison File Synchronizer

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2277254



--- Comment #2 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> ---
Package Review
==============

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

Issues:
=======
- Package does not use a name that already exists.
  Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
  https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/unison
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names

  This just means that you have to follow the unretirement process instead of
  the new package process.

- This package contains a bundled copy of ocaml-lwt in src/lwt.  Can it be
  unbundled?  It appears to be a very old copy of ocaml-lwt, possible even
  older than 1.1.0, which is the oldest tagged version at
  https://github.com/ocsigen/lwt.

- This package contains a bundled copy of ocaml-inotify in
  src/fsmonitor/inotify (see https://github.com/vincenthz/ocaml-inotify).
  We do not have that package in Fedora.  You should either create an
  ocaml-inotify package and unbundle it from unison, or add
  "Provides: bundled(ocaml-inotify)" (plus "= version" if the version can be
  determined) and make sure the License field represents the license of this
  code.

- This package contains code borrowed from OCaml itself in src/ubase/myMap.*
  and src/hash_compat.c.  The License field must reflect that.

- This package contains code borrowed from Xavier Leroy in src/ubase/uarg.*.
  The original license of this code will have to be determined and included in
  the License field.

- Change all instances of "%{__install}" to "install".  See
  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_macros

- In src/fswatchold.ml, function watchercmd attempts to find and run
  fsmonitor.py.  This package does not install fsmonitor.py.  Will that be a
  problem?

- Please add a %check script.  It just needs to run "make test".

- See the name-repeated-in-summary warnings from rpmlint below.  Perhaps the
  word "Unison" could be omitted from each Summary line?

Suggestions:
============
These are suggestions, not issues, so I'm giving them their own section.  Feel
free to ignore any or all of these.

- RPM now supports a less confusing %bcond syntax.  Consider replacing the
  first two lines of the file with:

  %bcond doc 1
  %bcond gtk 1

- Consider using %autorelease and %autochangelog.  See
  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#changelogs

- Consider changing "BuildRequires: texlive-latex" to
  "BuildRequires: tex-latex".  The virtual provide will remain available even
  if we switch from TeXLive to some other TeX distribution in the future.

- Consider making unison.desktop be Source1.  That way, the timestamp doesn't
  change on every build.

- Consider adding a metainfo file (which this package SHOULD have).  See
  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/

- Consider including the changelog of the previous iteration of the unison
  package, to give credit to those who worked on it before.

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

C/C++:
[-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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", "*No copyright* GNU General Public
     License, Version 3", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later", "*No
     copyright* GNU General Public License", "GNU Lesser General Public
     License, Version 2.1", "MIT License", "GNU Lesser General Public
     License", "Apple MIT License", "GNU General Public License, Version
     3", "GNU General Public License", "GNU Lesser General Public License
     v2.1 only". 212 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/jamesjer/2277254-unison/licensecheck.txt

     See notes about the License field under Issues.

[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.

     See notes about bundling of ocaml-lwt and ocaml-inotify under Issues.

[x]: 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.
[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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 115185 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]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[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]: 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 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]: 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.
[-]: 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.

     See request for a %check section under Issues above.

[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]: 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:
[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]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: unison-2.53.4-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          unison-gtk-2.53.4-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          unison-doc-2.53.4-1.fc41.noarch.rpm
          unison-debuginfo-2.53.4-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          unison-debugsource-2.53.4-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          unison-2.53.4-1.fc41.src.rpm
================================================ rpmlint session starts
================================================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmpxmllmd37')]
checks: 32, packages: 6

unison.src: E: spelling-error ('macOS', '%description -l en_US macOS -> ma Cos,
mac OS, mac-OS')
unison.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('macOS', '%description -l en_US macOS -> ma
Cos, mac OS, mac-OS')
unison.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary unison-fsmonitor
unison-gtk.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary unison-gui
unison-gtk.x86_64: W: no-documentation
unison.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary Unison
unison.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary Unison
unison.x86_64: W: binary-or-shlib-calls-gethostbyname /usr/bin/unison
unison.x86_64: W: binary-or-shlib-calls-gethostbyname /usr/bin/unison-fsmonitor
unison-gtk.x86_64: W: binary-or-shlib-calls-gethostbyname /usr/bin/unison-gui
========== 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 8 warnings, 32
filtered, 2 badness; has taken 1.6 s ===========




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: unison-gtk-debuginfo-2.53.4-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          unison-debuginfo-2.53.4-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
================================================ rpmlint session starts
================================================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmpwoiu29s2')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

========== 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 21
filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s ===========





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/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: 32, packages: 6

unison.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('macOS', '%description -l en_US macOS -> ma
Cos, mac OS, mac-OS')
unison-gtk.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary unison-gui
unison.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary unison-fsmonitor
unison-gtk.x86_64: W: no-documentation
unison.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary Unison
unison-gtk.x86_64: W: binary-or-shlib-calls-gethostbyname /usr/bin/unison-gui
unison.x86_64: W: binary-or-shlib-calls-gethostbyname /usr/bin/unison
unison.x86_64: W: binary-or-shlib-calls-gethostbyname /usr/bin/unison-fsmonitor
 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings, 35 filtered, 1
badness; has taken 1.6 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/bcpierce00/unison/archive/v2.53.4/unison-2.53.4.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
d19e4293013581dbc4d149aef89b34c76221efcbd873c7aa5193de489addb85a
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
d19e4293013581dbc4d149aef89b34c76221efcbd873c7aa5193de489addb85a


Requires
--------
unison (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

unison-gtk (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    hicolor-icon-theme
    ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libcairo.so.2()(64bit)
    libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
    libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
    libgdk-3.so.0()(64bit)
    libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit)
    libgtk-3.so.0()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

unison-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

unison-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

unison-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
unison:
    unison
    unison(x86-64)

unison-gtk:
    application()
    application(unison.desktop)
    unison-gtk
    unison-gtk(x86-64)

unison-doc:
    unison-doc

unison-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    unison-debuginfo
    unison-debuginfo(x86-64)

unison-debugsource:
    unison-debugsource
    unison-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2277254 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Python, Ruby, PHP, Haskell, SugarActivity, Java, Ocaml, R,
fonts, Perl
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH


-- 
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=2277254

Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202277254%23c2
--
_______________________________________________
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