https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297995 --- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov@xxxxxxxxx> --- * [Not a blocker] The file with licensing terms need some love. I don't think that "Copyright (c) <year> <copyright holders>" is a valid licensing term. However I see this as upstream issue not ours. In the mean time ask upstream to fill placeholders with a real values. * The more worrying issue is that the resulting RPM package couldn't be installed properly in chroot (while running fedora-review) on my machine. Maybe there is something wrong with my system or the package intended for fedora-41? Could you please investigate it? * Looks like you accidentally packaged two copies of licensing. Since the package heavily uses macros maybe adding it manually isn't necessary anymore. Take a look at this one. The same story with README.md. * Version 0.5.0 is out. Does anything stop you from packaging it? Apart from that I cannot see anything else so here is my formal Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not install properly. See my comments above. - Package contains duplicates in %files. See my comments above. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/cargo/registry/libpanel-0.4.0/COPYING ===== 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 (MIT or Apache-2.0). [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format (%autochangelog). [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. [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. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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]: 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 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]: 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 368 bytes in 1 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. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [?]: I did not test if the package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. See my note above. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Upstream doe not publish GPG signatures. [-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check section is passing but upstream does not have any tests. [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]: 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. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 5.6 starting (python version = 3.12.4, NVR = mock-5.6-1.fc40), args: /usr/libexec/mock/mock -r fedora-rawhide-x86_64 --no-cleanup-after --no-clean --resultdir=/home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results install /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/rust-libpanel-debugsource-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/rust-libpanel-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/libpanel-debuginfo-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/rust-libpanel+default-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/libpanel-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /home/petro/rpmbuild/SPECS/2297995-rust-libpanel/results/rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm 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 Mock Version: 5.6 INFO: Mock Version: 5.6 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: Package manager dnf5 detected and used (fallback) 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 INFO: Package manager dnf5 detected and used (direct choice) Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /builddir/rust-libpanel-debugsource-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/libpanel-debuginfo-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+default-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/libpanel-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed: # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 60e7538c8cdd41d8a23eb01272fc24e0 -D /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64-bootstrap/root -a --capability=cap_ipc_lock --bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.uo3catlv:/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/dnf5 --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 41 install /builddir/rust-libpanel-debugsource-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/libpanel-debuginfo-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+default-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/libpanel-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm /builddir/rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm --setopt=deltarpm=False --setopt=allow_vendor_change=yes --allowerasing --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: libpanel-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm rust-libpanel-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm rust-libpanel+default-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel-0.4.0-1.fc41.noarch.rpm rust-libpanel-debugsource-0.4.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm rust-libpanel-0.4.0-1.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/tmp7rma9tg1')] checks: 32, packages: 8 libpanel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary main rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-libpanel+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation libpanel.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary libpanel ===================================================================================================== 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings, 34 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 2.9 s ===================================================================================================== Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/libpanel/0.4.0/download#/libpanel-0.4.0.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ecbed4faf2b31e3cb2238a45bcec502bb98d4095c5bd17d539055090a90856bc CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ecbed4faf2b31e3cb2238a45bcec502bb98d4095c5bd17d539055090a90856bc Requires -------- libpanel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libadwaita-1.so.0()(64bit) libadwaita-1.so.0(LIBADWAITA_1_0)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.2.0)(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-4.so.1()(64bit) libpanel-1.so.1()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) rust-libpanel-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(futures-core) >= 0.3.0 with crate(futures-core) < 0.4.0~) (crate(gdk4/default) >= 0.8.0 with crate(gdk4/default) < 0.9.0~) (crate(gio/default) >= 0.19.0 with crate(gio/default) < 0.20.0~) (crate(glib/default) >= 0.19.0 with crate(glib/default) < 0.20.0~) (crate(gtk4/default) >= 0.8.0 with crate(gtk4/default) < 0.9.0~) (crate(libadwaita/default) >= 0.6.0 with crate(libadwaita/default) < 0.7.0~) (crate(libc/default) >= 0.2.140 with crate(libc/default) < 0.3.0~) (crate(libpanel-sys/default) >= 0.4.0 with crate(libpanel-sys/default) < 0.5.0~) cargo rust rust-libpanel+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(libpanel) rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(libadwaita/v1_2) >= 0.6.0 with crate(libadwaita/v1_2) < 0.7.0~) cargo crate(libpanel) rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(libpanel-sys/v1_2) >= 0.4.0 with crate(libpanel-sys/v1_2) < 0.5.0~) cargo crate(libpanel) rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(libpanel-sys/v1_4) >= 0.4.0 with crate(libpanel-sys/v1_4) < 0.5.0~) cargo crate(libpanel) crate(libpanel/v1_2) rust-libpanel-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- libpanel: libpanel libpanel(x86-64) rust-libpanel-devel: crate(libpanel) rust-libpanel-devel rust-libpanel+default-devel: crate(libpanel/default) rust-libpanel+default-devel rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel: crate(libpanel/adw_v1_2) rust-libpanel+adw_v1_2-devel rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel: crate(libpanel/v1_2) rust-libpanel+v1_2-devel rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel: crate(libpanel/v1_4) rust-libpanel+v1_4-devel rust-libpanel-debugsource: rust-libpanel-debugsource rust-libpanel-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2297995 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: C/C++, PHP, Ocaml, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, R, Perl, Haskell, Java 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=2297995 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202297995%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
