https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2297308
Benson Muite <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+ Status|NEW |POST Assignee|[email protected] |[email protected] --- Comment #22 from Benson Muite <[email protected]> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/bash-preexec/2297308-bash- preexec/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/profile.d [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: 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. [ ]: 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. [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]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [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 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]: 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 4900 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). [ ]: Package functions as described. [!]: 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]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Rpmlint ------- Checking: bash-preexec-0.6.0-1.fc46.noarch.rpm bash-preexec-all-users-0.6.0-1.fc46.noarch.rpm bash-preexec-0.6.0-1.fc46.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpi004vizr')] checks: 32, packages: 3 bash-preexec.spec:27: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bash(PROMPT_COMMAND) bash-preexec.spec:29: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bash(DEBUG) bash-preexec.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized preexec and precmd functions for Bash just like Zsh bash-preexec.src: W: summary-not-capitalized preexec and precmd functions for Bash just like Zsh bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized bash-preexec init script for all users bash-preexec.noarch: E: spelling-error ('precmd', 'Summary(en_US) precmd -> precede') bash-preexec.noarch: E: spelling-error ('precmd', '%description -l en_US precmd -> precede') bash-preexec.src: E: spelling-error ('precmd', 'Summary(en_US) precmd -> precede') bash-preexec.src: E: spelling-error ('precmd', '%description -l en_US precmd -> precede') bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: E: spelling-error ('init', 'Summary(en_US) init -> unit, int, nit') bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: E: spelling-error ('precmd', '%description -l en_US precmd -> precede') bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: E: spelling-error ('init', '%description -l en_US init -> unit, int, nit') bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: W: no-documentation bash-preexec.spec: W: no-%build-section 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 7 warnings, 11 filtered, 7 badness; has taken 0.4 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.10.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.15/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: 33, packages: 2 bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized bash-preexec init script for all users bash-preexec.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized preexec and precmd functions for Bash just like Zsh bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: E: spelling-error ('init', 'Summary(en_US) init -> unit, int, nit') bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: E: spelling-error ('precmd', '%description -l en_US precmd -> precede') bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: E: spelling-error ('init', '%description -l en_US init -> unit, int, nit') bash-preexec.noarch: E: spelling-error ('precmd', 'Summary(en_US) precmd -> precede') bash-preexec.noarch: E: spelling-error ('precmd', '%description -l en_US precmd -> precede') bash-preexec-all-users.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 3 warnings, 7 filtered, 5 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/rcaloras/bash-preexec/archive/refs/tags/0.6.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1a987c0ef0e9cfa0391389327c5aef30166325b32666adde3daa9b809850cdd1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1a987c0ef0e9cfa0391389327c5aef30166325b32666adde3daa9b809850cdd1 Requires -------- bash-preexec (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): bash-preexec-all-users (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): bash-preexec config(bash-preexec-all-users) Provides -------- bash-preexec: bash(DEBUG) bash(PROMPT_COMMAND) bash-preexec bash-preexec-all-users: bash-preexec-all-users config(bash-preexec-all-users) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/bash-preexec/2297308-bash-preexec/srpm/bash-preexec.spec 2026-08-28 05:02:55.105167951 +0300 +++ /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/bash-preexec/2297308-bash-preexec/srpm-unpacked/bash-preexec.spec 2026-05-28 03:00:00.000000000 +0300 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.8.4) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 1; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + Name: bash-preexec Version: 0.6.0 @@ -73,4 +83,6 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog - +## START: Generated by rpmautospec +* Thu May 28 2026 John Doe <[email protected]> - 0.6.0-1 +- Uncommitted changes +## END: Generated by rpmautospec Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2297308 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Perl, Ocaml, SugarActivity, fonts, R, PHP, Java, Python, C/C++, Haskell Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) Koji build https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=149552478 b) Please update to latest release 0.7. where https://github.com/rcaloras/bash-preexec/pull/143 has been merged. c) Approved -- 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=2297308 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202297308%23c22 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
