https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1541329

Harald Hoyer <har...@redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Harald Hoyer <har...@redhat.com> ---

This is a review *template*. Besides handling the [ ]-marked tests you are
also supposed to fix the template before pasting into bugzilla:
- Add issues you find to the list of issues on top. If there isn't such
  a list, create one.
- Add your own remarks to the template checks.
- Add new lines marked [!] or [?] when you discover new things not
  listed by fedora-review.
- Change or remove any text in the template which is plain wrong. In this
  case you could also file a bug against fedora-review
- Remove the "[ ] Manual check required", you will not have any such lines
  in what you paste.
- Remove attachments which you deem not really useful (the rpmlint
  ones are mandatory, though)
- Remove this text



Package Review
==============

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


Issues:
=======
- Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: libvarlink-debugsource :
  /usr/src/debug/libvarlink-1-1.fc28.x86_64/lib/array.h libvarlink-
  debugsource : /usr/src/debug/libvarlink-1-1.fc28.x86_64/lib/avltree.h
  libvarlink-debugsource :
  [… crap]
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2


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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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:
[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: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 79
     files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/harald/review/1541329-libvarlink/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/vim,
     /usr/share/vim/vimfiles/after, /usr/share/vim/vimfiles
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
     /usr/share/vim/vimfiles/after/ftdetect(vim-filesystem, libvarlink),
     /usr/share/vim/vimfiles/after/ftplugin(vim-filesystem, libvarlink),
     /usr/lib/.build-id(audacious-plugins, zint, kde-platform-plugin,
     [… crap]
[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.
[-]: 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 (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]: 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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]: 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

===== 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.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     libvarlink-util , libvarlink-debuginfo , libvarlink-debugsource
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[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]: 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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[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: libvarlink-1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
          libvarlink-devel-1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
          libvarlink-util-1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
          libvarlink-debuginfo-1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
          libvarlink-debugsource-1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
          libvarlink-1-1.fc28.src.rpm
libvarlink.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Varlink -> Var link,
Var-link, Interlink
libvarlink.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Varlink -> Var link,
Var-link, Interlink
libvarlink.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libvarlink-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Varlink -> Var link,
Var-link, Interlink
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary varlink
libvarlink-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Varlink -> Var link, Var-link,
Interlink
libvarlink.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Varlink -> Var link,
Var-link, Interlink
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: libvarlink-debuginfo-1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
          libvarlink-util-debuginfo-1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
libvarlink-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
https://github.com/varlink/libvarlink <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service
not known>
libvarlink-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Varlink -> Var link,
Var-link, Interlink
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
https://github.com/varlink/libvarlink <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service
not known>
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink-util.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary varlink
libvarlink-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
https://github.com/varlink/libvarlink <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service
not known>
libvarlink-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libvarlink-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Varlink -> Var link,
Var-link, Interlink
libvarlink.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Varlink -> Var link,
Var-link, Interlink
libvarlink.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/varlink/libvarlink
<urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
libvarlink.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libvarlink-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
https://github.com/varlink/libvarlink <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service
not known>
libvarlink-util-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
https://github.com/varlink/libvarlink <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service
not known>
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.



Requires
--------
libvarlink-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    libvarlink(x86-64)
    libvarlink.so.0()(64bit)

libvarlink-util (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libvarlink-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

libvarlink-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

libvarlink (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /sbin/ldconfig
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)



Provides
--------
libvarlink-devel:
    libvarlink-devel
    libvarlink-devel(x86-64)
    pkgconfig(libvarlink)

libvarlink-util:
    libvarlink-util
    libvarlink-util(x86-64)

libvarlink-debugsource:
    libvarlink-debugsource
    libvarlink-debugsource(x86-64)

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

libvarlink:
    libvarlink
    libvarlink(x86-64)
    libvarlink.so.0()(64bit)
    libvarlink.so.0(LIBVARLINK_1)(64bit)



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/varlink/libvarlink/archive/1/libvarlink-1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
a20baddbf47259bd1084e38dee71c7687d66999a6b5e2049af4d4044a74648b8
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
a20baddbf47259bd1084e38dee71c7687d66999a6b5e2049af4d4044a74648b8


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1541329
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

Reply via email to