[Bug 1118267] Review Request: aces_container - ACES Container Reference
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Aug 24 02:53:53 UTC 2014
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1118267
Susi Lehtola <susi.lehtola at iki.fi> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Susi Lehtola <susi.lehtola at iki.fi> ---
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
===== MUST items =====
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[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.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
- Need to Requires: cmake in -devel for %{_libdir}/cmake.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
- See above.
[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.
- The name with the underscore is allowed per
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Separators
relevant section:
"packages where the upstream name naturally contains an underscore are excluded
from this"
[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.
[-]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[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 %doc.
[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]: 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 do not use a name that already exist
[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]: 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
[-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: 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.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[-]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[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]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
arched.
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: aces_container-1.0-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
aces_container-devel-1.0-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm
aces_container-1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm
aces_container.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US keycode -> key
code, key-code, cockeyed
aces_container-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
aces_container-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
aces_container.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US keycode -> key
code, key-code, cockeyed
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
These are OK.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint aces_container aces_container-devel
aces_container.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US keycode -> key
code, key-code, cockeyed
aces_container.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libAcesContainer.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6
aces_container-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
aces_container-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'
As are these.
Requires
--------
aces_container (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/sbin/ldconfig
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
aces_container-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/usr/bin/pkg-config
aces_container(x86-64)
libAcesContainer.so.1()(64bit)
Provides
--------
aces_container:
aces_container
aces_container(x86-64)
libAcesContainer.so.1()(64bit)
aces_container-devel:
aces_container-devel
aces_container-devel(x86-64)
pkgconfig(AcesContainer)
Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/ampas/aces_container/archive/v1.0.tar.gz :
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
9d310605ce15b03689b1e5b7b3cf735e236b4d11a78654018321ae593af69aba
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
9d310605ce15b03689b1e5b7b3cf735e236b4d11a78654018321ae593af69aba
Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -r -n aces_container-1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R,
PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
***
Add the requires to the -devel. With this modification the package is
APPROVED
--
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
More information about the package-review
mailing list