https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1636019
--- Comment #12 from jiri vanek <jva...@redhat.com> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: BUILDSTDERR: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/java/java- runtime-decompiler See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles - This seems like a Java package, please install fedora-review-plugin-java to get additional checks ===== 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. [!]: 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. Both packages are misisng license or license i handled wrongly [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 50 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jvanek/1636019-java-runtime-decompiler/licensecheck.txt However Severin had some issues with your licensing [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. as above [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [!]: Changelog in prescribed format. please, double check versioning [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. Note: No (noreplace) in %config /etc/java-runtime- decompiler/plugins/FernflowerDecompilerWrapper.java %config /etc/java- runtime-decompiler/plugins/ProcyonDecompilerWrapper.java [!]: 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. Note that there may be issue once you will handle license correctly. [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. [x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. Correct form my point of view, but Severin have correct remarks. Please double check instlability and work after you do so. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: 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]: 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]: 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]: No %config files under /usr. [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 Java: [x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build ===== 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. [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). I think the java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: E: devel-dependency java-devel is acceptable here There are more rpmlint issues, please fix them. Moslty minors, but resolvces into rpmlint errors. [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in java- runtime-decompiler-javadoc [!]: Package functions as described. See the issues in luncher [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. Did not build for rahide, is no arch. Do it work on non-jit arches? [-]: %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]: 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 all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: java-runtime-decompiler-1.1-1.fc29.noarch.rpm java-runtime-decompiler-javadoc-1.1-1.fc29.noarch.rpm java-runtime-decompiler-1.1-1.fc29.src.rpm java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: E: devel-dependency java-devel java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) bytecode -> byte code, byte-code, decorate java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) decompilation -> recompilation, compilation, contemplation java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot C Application for extraction of bytecode from running JVM and its decompilation back to source code. java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: E: summary-too-long C Application for extraction of bytecode from running JVM and its decompilation back to source code. java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bytecode -> byte code, byte-code, decorate java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US decompile -> recompile, compile java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C This application can access JVM memory at runtime, extract classes and their bytecode from the JVM and decompile them back to the source code. It needs an agent jar and external decompiler for targeted JVM language (e.g. Java). java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0-1 ['1.1-1.fc29', '1.1-1'] java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/java-runtime-decompiler/plugins/FernflowerDecompilerWrapper.java java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/java-runtime-decompiler/plugins/ProcyonDecompilerWrapper.java java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/java-runtime-decompiler/runtime-decompiler.jar java-runtime-decompiler-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL java-runtime-decompiler.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) bytecode -> byte code, byte-code, decorate java-runtime-decompiler.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) decompilation -> recompilation, compilation, contemplation java-runtime-decompiler.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot C Application for extraction of bytecode from running JVM and its decompilation back to source code. java-runtime-decompiler.src: E: summary-too-long C Application for extraction of bytecode from running JVM and its decompilation back to source code. java-runtime-decompiler.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bytecode -> byte code, byte-code, decorate java-runtime-decompiler.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US decompile -> recompile, compile java-runtime-decompiler.src: E: description-line-too-long C This application can access JVM memory at runtime, extract classes and their bytecode from the JVM and decompile them back to the source code. It needs an agent jar and external decompiler for targeted JVM language (e.g. Java). java-runtime-decompiler.src: W: invalid-license GPL 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 17 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory java-runtime-decompiler-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL java-runtime-decompiler-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/pmikova/java-runtime-decompiler <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: E: devel-dependency java-devel java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) bytecode -> byte code, byte-code, decorate java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) decompilation -> recompilation, compilation, contemplation java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot C Application for extraction of bytecode from running JVM and its decompilation back to source code. java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: E: summary-too-long C Application for extraction of bytecode from running JVM and its decompilation back to source code. java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bytecode -> byte code, byte-code, decorate java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US decompile -> recompile, compile java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C This application can access JVM memory at runtime, extract classes and their bytecode from the JVM and decompile them back to the source code. It needs an agent jar and external decompiler for targeted JVM language (e.g. Java). java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0-1 ['1.1-1.fc29', '1.1-1'] java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/pmikova/java-runtime-decompiler <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/java-runtime-decompiler/plugins/FernflowerDecompilerWrapper.java java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/java-runtime-decompiler/plugins/ProcyonDecompilerWrapper.java java-runtime-decompiler.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/java-runtime-decompiler/runtime-decompiler.jar 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 13 warnings. Requires -------- java-runtime-decompiler-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): java-runtime-decompiler javapackages-filesystem java-runtime-decompiler (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/bash byteman config(java-runtime-decompiler) google-gson java-devel java-headless javapackages-filesystem javapackages-tools mvn(com.fifesoft:rsyntaxtextarea) mvn(com.google.code.gson:gson) mvn(com.sun:tools) mvn(org.jboss.byteman:byteman-install) rsyntaxtextarea Provides -------- java-runtime-decompiler-javadoc: java-runtime-decompiler-javadoc java-runtime-decompiler: config(java-runtime-decompiler) java-runtime-decompiler mvn(java:decompiler-agent) mvn(java:decompiler-agent:pom:) mvn(java:java-runtime-decompiler:pom:) mvn(java:runtime-decompiler) mvn(java:runtime-decompiler:pom:) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/pmikova/java-runtime-decompiler/archive/java-runtime-decompiler-1.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 4841ea31c00c6f254754916584c4596b7b66ec947e0bdc4d026f51e5445eda88 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 4841ea31c00c6f254754916584c4596b7b66ec947e0bdc4d026f51e5445eda88 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1636019 -m fedora-29-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-29-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Java Disabled plugins: C/C++, 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
