[Bug 1658851] Review Request: perl-Schedule-Cron - Provides a simple
but complete cron like scheduler
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1658851
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed| |2018-12-27 01:50:51
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
perl-Schedule-Cron-1.01-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
--
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
5 years, 4 months
[Bug 1657533] Review Request: genesis-simulator - A general purpose
simulation platform
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1657533
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed| |2018-12-27 01:50:47
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
genesis-simulator-2.4-1.20181209git374cdbc.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora
28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this
bug report.
--
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
5 years, 4 months
[Bug 1651739] Review Request: caribou EPEL7 - EPEL7 branch of
caribou (cinnamon prereq)
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1651739
Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution|CANTFIX |ERRATA
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org> ---
caribou0-0.4.21-12.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
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
5 years, 4 months
[Bug 1360277] Review Request: qt-installer-framework - The Qt
Installer Framework
by bugzilla@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1360277
Manas Mangaonkar (Pac23) <manasmangaonkar(a)gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |manasmangaonkar(a)gmail.com
--- Comment #13 from Manas Mangaonkar (Pac23) <manasmangaonkar(a)gmail.com> ---
Not a official review
--------------------------
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[x] = Manual review needed
Issues
======
- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
present.
Note: Package has .a files: qt-installer-framework. Illegal package name:
qt-installer-framework. Does not provide -static: qt-installer-framework.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries
- 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.
Note: License file ifw-license-check-page.png is not marked as %license
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
===== MUST items =====
C/C++:
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: 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: "Public domain", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v2)",
"Unknown or generated", "GNU Free Documentation License", "GNU Free
Documentation License (v1.3)", "*No copyright* Public domain", "GPL
(v3)", "LGPL (v2.1 or v3)". 915 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /root/review/normal/qt-installer-
framework/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/doc/qt5,
/usr/lib64/qt5/bin
[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.
[x]: 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.
[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.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 30720 bytes in 2 files.
[!]: 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]: 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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic:
[!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in qt-
installer-framework-doc , qt-installer-framework-debuginfo , qt-
installer-framework-debugsource
[x]: Package functions as described.
[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.
[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]: 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:
[ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
is arched.
Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 5867520 bytes in /usr/share
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: qt-installer-framework-3.0.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
qt-installer-framework-doc-3.0.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
qt-installer-framework-debuginfo-3.0.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
qt-installer-framework-debugsource-3.0.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
qt-installer-framework-3.0.6-1.fc30.src.rpm
qt-installer-framework.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/lib7z.a
qt-installer-framework.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/libinstaller.a
qt-installer-framework.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/qt-installer-framework/Changelog
qt-installer-framework.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/qt-installer-framework/README
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: qt-installer-framework-debuginfo-3.0.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
please look into the issues though,as this is not as per the packaging
guidelines for static libraries.
--
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
5 years, 5 months