[Bug 2319426] Review Request: kookbook - Cookbook creator

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2319426

Scott K Logan <logans@xxxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value
           Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    |logans@xxxxxxxxxxx
                 CC|                            |logans@xxxxxxxxxxx
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?
                   |                            |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai
                   |                            |lplus.org)
           Keywords|AutomationTriaged           |
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED



--- Comment #2 from Scott K Logan <logans@xxxxxxxxxxx> ---
Package Review
==============

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

===== Summary =====

Notes:
- Packaging guidelines state that there should be a separator between the
  snapshot date and the revision ('.', 'git', or 'g' would be appropriate) [1]
- The license text isn't included when 'kookbook' is installed, but should be
[2]
  I believe there is a missing dependency on the -extras subpackage from the
arched
  base package
- Inter-subpackage dependencies should be version-specific to avoid
  partial upgrades: `= %{version}%{release}`
- Consider using the %ctest macro, or at the very least %__ctest
- Though krecipies.py is installed as a sort of example and isn't executable
as-is,
  consider requiring the Python interpreter needed to invoke it.
- Licensing checks out - the CC stuff is for CI and isn't installed.

[1]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_complex_versioning
[2]
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#subpackage-licensing

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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[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]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[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.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Creative Commons CC0 1.0", "Unknown or generated", "MIT
     License", "*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 1.0", "MIT License
     and/or X11 License". 32 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-
     rpmbuild/results/kookbook/licensecheck.txt
[!]: 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.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: 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.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 5949 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[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.
[!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     kookbook-extras , kookbook-touch , kookbook-krecipes-convert
[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.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: kookbook-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          kookbook-extras-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.noarch.rpm
          kookbook-touch-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          kookbook-krecipes-convert-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.noarch.rpm
          kookbook-debuginfo-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          kookbook-debugsource-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          kookbook-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.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/tmpq_ueedzw')]
checks: 32, packages: 7

kookbook.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kookbook
kookbook-touch.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kookbooktouch
kookbook.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kookbook-touch.x86_64: W: no-documentation
kookbook-extras.noarch: W: gzipped-svg-icon
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps/kookbook.svgz
kookbook-extras.noarch: W: description-shorter-than-summary
 7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings, 32 filtered, 0
badness; has taken 0.5 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: kookbook-debuginfo-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          kookbook-touch-debuginfo-0.2.1^2024053056b0c4d9-1.fc42.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/tmp40evomdq')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 16 filtered, 0
badness; has taken 0.2 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "kookbook".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "kookbook-extras".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "kookbook-touch".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "kookbook-debuginfo".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "kookbook-krecipes-convert".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "kookbook-debugsource".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "kookbook-touch-debuginfo".
There are no files to process nor additional arguments.
Nothing to do, aborting.
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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: 7

 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0
badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://invent.kde.org/utilities/kookbook/-/archive/56b0c4d9eb3fdf8829fee3c46ccd442c5348eacb/kookbook-56b0c4d9.tar.gz
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
09ef8da0cfc6cd8e41b87306ed41a74fcbcf8b65ac98781f95f0d0ac4f97f658
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
09ef8da0cfc6cd8e41b87306ed41a74fcbcf8b65ac98781f95f0d0ac4f97f658


Requires
--------
kookbook (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libQt6Core.so.6()(64bit)
    libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit)
    libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6.8)(64bit)
    libQt6Gui.so.6()(64bit)
    libQt6Gui.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit)
    libQt6PrintSupport.so.6()(64bit)
    libQt6PrintSupport.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit)
    libQt6Widgets.so.6()(64bit)
    libQt6Widgets.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

kookbook-extras (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    hicolor-icon-theme

kookbook-touch (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    kookbook-extras
    libQt6Core.so.6()(64bit)
    libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit)
    libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6.8)(64bit)
    libQt6Gui.so.6()(64bit)
    libQt6Gui.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit)
    libQt6Qml.so.6()(64bit)
    libQt6Qml.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

kookbook-krecipes-convert (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    kookbook-extras

kookbook-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

kookbook-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
kookbook:
    application()
    application(org.kde.kookbook.desktop)
    kookbook
    kookbook(x86-64)

kookbook-extras:
    kookbook-extras
    metainfo()
    metainfo(org.kde.kookbook.appdata.xml)

kookbook-touch:
    application()
    application(org.kde.kookbooktouch.desktop)
    kookbook-touch
    kookbook-touch(x86-64)

kookbook-krecipes-convert:
    kookbook-krecipes-convert

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

kookbook-debugsource:
    kookbook-debugsource
    kookbook-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name
kookbook --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, Ocaml, R, Java, Haskell, Perl, SugarActivity, Python,
fonts
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH


-- 
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=2319426

Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202319426%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