https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1359412
--- Comment #12 from David Kaspar [Dee'Kej] <dkas...@redhat.com> --- Sorry for the delay, I was struggling to run fedora-review tool because of BZ #1350930. Anyway, I made it to work, so here are the rest of necessary formalities... rpmlint result (specfile): ========================== > Checking: gawkextlib-debuginfo-1.0.2-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rmplint result (*.rpm): ======================= > gawkextlib.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, ml, x > ml ->> The %description is mentioning the exact package 'gawk-xml' [OK] > gawkextlib.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pgsql -> SQL ->> The %description is mentioning the exact package 'gawk-pgsql' [OK] > gawkextlib.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libgawkextlib.so.0.0.0 > exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 ->> Shared library calls exit(3) - this is something that should be either fixed or explained if this is safe to do so. [WARNING] > gawkextlib.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id > gawkextlib.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id ->> This is "feature" of fedora-rawhide builds. [OK] > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. rpmlint result (*-devel.rpm): ============================= > gawkextlib-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib ->> The header file is in correct location. The other file is symlink, which is non-binary, but this is correct. [OK] > gawkextlib-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation ->> Andrew already mentioned the lack of documentation in upstream ATM, but the header file itself should be commented sufficiently. [OK] > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. =========================================================== fedora-review results: =========================================================== Issues: ======= - Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/dkaspar/Downloads/reviews/review-gawkextlib/diff.txt See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL >> Andrew most likely modified the package again after I donwloaded it and ran >> the fedora-review on it. I've checked the *.src.rpm and its sane. [OK] ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Generic: [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "GPL", "FSF All Permissive", "Unknown or generated". 31 files have unknown license. > The whole project is licensed under GPLv3+. Some files use FSF copyright note > stating that re-licensing to GPL is allowed, and therefore used. [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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Permissions on files are set properly. [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]: 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: [ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in gawkextlib-debuginfo > We are not genereating debuginfo manually, mock does it now automatically. > This is most likely bug either of mock or fedora-review package. [OK] [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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [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. Requires -------- gawkextlib-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gawk-devel gawkextlib(x86-64) libgawkextlib.so.0()(64bit) gawkextlib-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gawkextlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig gawk libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- gawkextlib-devel: gawkextlib-devel gawkextlib-devel(x86-64) gawkextlib-debuginfo: gawkextlib-debuginfo gawkextlib-debuginfo(x86-64) gawkextlib: gawkextlib gawkextlib(x86-64) libgawkextlib.so.0()(64bit) Source checksums ---------------- http://sourceforge.net/projects/gawkextlib/files/gawkextlib-1.0.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1194f9f76b0db9b0d27146f349efb57d09d63771c9bddc71640b81c9515d9678 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 271ea0d473fbbbbc921db65cbc38e74e3bde42a095a38dbac0207e199dfda705 diff -r also reports differences > Already mentioned the reason above. Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n gawkextlib Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 -- 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 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
