[Bug 1551153] Review Request: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin - Binaries that are needed for the NFV host Tuned profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551153

Jaroslav Škarvada  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
Last Closed||2018-03-21 08:39:55



-- 
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

[Bug 1551153] Review Request: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin - Binaries that are needed for the NFV host Tuned profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551153



--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin

-- 
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

[Bug 1551153] Review Request: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin - Binaries that are needed for the NFV host Tuned profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551153

Matěj Týč  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #4 from Matěj Týč  ---
The package is OK, I set the review flag.

-- 
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

[Bug 1551153] Review Request: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin - Binaries that are needed for the NFV host Tuned profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551153



--- Comment #3 from Jaroslav Škarvada  ---
(In reply to Matěj Týč from comment #2)
Thanks for the review.

> Issues:
> ===
> - 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: coreutils gcc make
>   See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2

This is one of the false positives of the tool. In the past there was such
rule, but currently there isn't (also the above wiki link no longer contains
the exceptions) and all build requires have to be listed:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Build-Time_Dependencies_.28BuildRequires.29

-- 
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

[Bug 1551153] Review Request: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin - Binaries that are needed for the NFV host Tuned profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551153



--- Comment #2 from Matěj Týč  ---
Pasting complete output of fedora-review.

Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- 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: coreutils gcc make
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- Possibly undetected conflict with tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin
- 


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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: "LGPL (v2)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "BSD (2 clause) GPL (v2 or
 later)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* LGPL (v2)", "LGPL
 (v2.1)", "GPL (v2)", "*No copyright* GPL (v2)". 189 files have unknown
 license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/matyc/tests/fedora-
 review/1551153-tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/licensecheck.txt
Files are licensed under GPL2, unless stated otherwise.
All licences are accepted by Fedora.

[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.
[-]: 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.
The package is believed to create conflict, but the review tool haven't
detected it.

[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.
Advised to reduce BuildRequires to just "binutils"

[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: 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 must own all directories that it creates.
[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]: 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:
[x]: 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]: Package functions as described.
[-]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
 translations for supported Non-English 

[Bug 1551153] Review Request: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin - Binaries that are needed for the NFV host Tuned profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551153



--- Comment #1 from Matěj Týč  ---
Posting the rpmlint output as per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines:

Rpmlint 
--- 
Checking: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin-0-0.1.20180302git1edfa966.fc29.x86_64.rpm 
  tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin-0-0.1.20180302git1edfa966.fc29.src.rpm
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share
/usr/share/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/tscdeadline_latency.flat 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: E: statically-linked-binary
/usr/share/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/tscdeadline_latency.flat 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: W: executable-stack
/usr/share/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/tscdeadline_latency.flat 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: W: no-documentation 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.src:31: W: configure-without-libdir-spec
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings.   


Rpmlint (installed packages)

sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory  
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL:
http://www.linux-kvm.org/page/KVM-unit-tests   
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: E: arch-dependent-file-in-usr-share
/usr/share/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/tscdeadline_latency.flat 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: W: ldd-failed
/usr/share/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/tscdeadline_latency.flat 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: E: statically-linked-binary
/usr/share/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/tscdeadline_latency.flat 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: W: executable-stack
/usr/share/tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin/tscdeadline_latency.flat 
tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin.x86_64: W: no-documentation 
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 4 warnings.

The invalid-url warning doesn't make sense, errors have been explained by the
post above.

-- 
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

[Bug 1551153] Review Request: tuned-profiles-nfv-host-bin - Binaries that are needed for the NFV host Tuned profile

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1551153

Jaroslav Škarvada  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ma...@redhat.com



-- 
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