https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778456
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- These files are duplicated in %files:
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1*
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}-*.1*
- Split the docs into a separate noarch subpackage:
- Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 5877760 bytes in 187 files.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_documentation
- Remove shebang in %prep:
cdist.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/cdist/config.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
cdist.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/cdist/install.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
cdist.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/cdist/integration.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
cdist.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/cdist/inventory.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
cdist.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python3.8/site-packages/cdist/log.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/man/man1/cdist-dump.1.gz
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_duplicate_files
- Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 5877760 bytes in 187 files.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_documentation
= 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]: 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]: 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* GPL (v3 or later)",
"GPL (v3 or later)", "GNU General Public License (v3)", "GNU General
Public License (v3 or later)", "GNU General Public License", "*No
copyright* GNU General Public License (v3)". 943 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/cdist/review-cdist/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: 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]: 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 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]: 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]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not
