package-review July 2019

package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

1 participants
465 discussions

[Bug 1608949] Review Request: tini - A tiny but valid init for containers
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 12 Jul '19

12 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1608949 Olivier Lemasle <o.lemasle(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |o.lemasle(a)gmail.com --- Comment #3 from Olivier Lemasle <o.lemasle(a)gmail.com> --- Hello, - I know you removed "BuildRequires: gcc" following the first review request. However, the package does not build anymore on Rawhide or Fedora30 without a build dependency to gcc. Furthermore, it is now requested by guidelines [1] to list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang for C/C++ projects. - Your changelog entry has not the standard format: version number should be on the same line as the timestamp: * Wed Jul 18 2018 Ricardo Martinelli de Oliveira <ricardo.martinelli.oliveira(a)gmail.com> - 0.18.0 - Initial version - Static executable: You removed "tini-static" following the first review request. This is indeed following Fedora Packaging guidelines [2]. However, Docker depends on a statically-linked "tini" binary. Currently, package "moby-engine" [3] builds and bundles its own "tini". I'd like to depend on your project instead of building a separate version of tini, to follow Fedora Packaging Guidelines. However, that would require having "tini-static" in this package. Do you think it could be an exception to the guidelines, given that: - tini depends only on libc - package "moby-engine" currently already ships a statically linked version of "tini". [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/#_build… [2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_statically_link… [3] https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/moby-engine/ -- 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

1 0

[Bug 1723572] New: Review Request: python-cachecontrol - The httplib2 caching algorithms packaged up for use with requests.
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1723572 Bug ID: 1723572 Summary: Review Request: python-cachecontrol - The httplib2 caching algorithms packaged up for use with requests. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: dylan(a)theone.ninja QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dstathis/insights-core/fedo… SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dstathis/insights-core/fedo… Description: The httplib2 caching algorithms packaged up for use with requests. https://github.com/ionrock/cachecontrol This is a dependency for insights-core ps: This is my first batch of Review requests and I am seeking a packaging sponsor. Fedora Account System Username: dstathis -- 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

1 7

[Bug 1727142] New: Review Request: python-text-unidecode - text-unidecode is the most basic port of the Text::Unidecode Perl library
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1727142 Bug ID: 1727142 Summary: Review Request: python-text-unidecode - text-unidecode is the most basic port of the Text::Unidecode Perl library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: dms(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dmsimard/python-text-unicode-distgit/mast… SRPM URL: https://github.com/dmsimard/python-text-unicode-distgit/raw/master/python-t… Description: text-unidecode is the most basic port of the Text::Unidecode Perl library Fedora Account System Username: dmsimard -- 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

1 4

[Bug 1723060] New: Review Request: python-exifread - A Python module to extract Exif metadata from images
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1723060 Bug ID: 1723060 Summary: Review Request: python-exifread - A Python module to extract Exif metadata from images Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: mail(a)fabian-affolter.ch QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-exifread.spec SRPM URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-exifread-2.1.2-1.fc30.sr… Project URL: https://github.com/ianare/exif-py Description: Easy to use Python module to extract Exif metadata from tiff and jpeg files. Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=35724444 rpmlint output: $ rpmlint python-exifread-2.1.2-1.fc30.src.rpm python-exifread.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jpeg -> JPEG, peg 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint python3-exifread-2.1.2-1.fc30.noarch.rpm python3-exifread.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jpeg -> JPEG, peg 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Fedora Account System Username: fab -- 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

1 1

[Bug 1728348] New: Review Request: libarcus-lulzbot -
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1728348 Bug ID: 1728348 Summary: Review Request: libarcus-lulzbot - Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org Reporter: tcallawa(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/libarcus-lulzbot.spec SRPM URL: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/libarcus-lulzbot-3.6.12-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: Communication library between Cura components, Lulzbot fork Fedora Account System Username: spot This is a new BuildRequires/Requires for cura-lulzbot, since it hasn't caught up with the current libarcus bits. -- 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

1 13

[Bug 1392599] Review Request: mcrcon - Console based rcon client for minecraft servers
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1392599 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #10 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- Disregard, you are already a member of the packager group. You can request your repo now. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- 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

1 0

[Bug 1392599] Review Request: mcrcon - Console based rcon client for minecraft servers
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1392599 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> --- - Group: is not used in Fedora Package is approved, please fix the aforementioned issue before import. You still needto find a sponsor though. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=P… https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [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: "Unknown or generated", "zlib/libpng license". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/mcrcon/review-mcrcon/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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. [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]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 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 %license. [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]: 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: [-]: 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. [-]: 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. [-]: %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: [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). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: mcrcon-0.6.1-2.fc31.x86_64.rpm mcrcon-debuginfo-0.6.1-2.fc31.x86_64.rpm mcrcon-debugsource-0.6.1-2.fc31.x86_64.rpm mcrcon-0.6.1-2.fc31.src.rpm mcrcon.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) rcon -> econ, con, recon mcrcon.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) minecraft -> mine craft, mine-craft, craftiness mcrcon.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US minecraft -> mine craft, mine-craft, craftiness mcrcon.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rcon -> econ, con, recon mcrcon.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bukkit -> kabuki mcrcon.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) rcon -> econ, con, recon mcrcon.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) minecraft -> mine craft, mine-craft, craftiness mcrcon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US minecraft -> mine craft, mine-craft, craftiness mcrcon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rcon -> econ, con, recon mcrcon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bukkit -> kabuki 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings. -- 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

1 0

[Bug 1392599] Review Request: mcrcon - Console based rcon client for minecraft servers
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1392599 Robert-André Mauchin <zebob.m(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zebob.m(a)gmail.com Blocks| |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- 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

1 0

[Bug 1527562] Review Request: gstreamer-imx - GStreamer 1.0 plugins for i.MX platforms
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1527562 Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed| |2019-07-11 16:54:00 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart(a)gmail.com> --- I don't plan to work on this anytime soon. I hope imx will have a standard v4l2 rendering pipe. -- 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

1 0

[Bug 1440687] Review Request: shc - Shell script compiler
by bugzilla＠redhat.com 11 Jul '19

11 Jul '19

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1440687 Robin Lee <robinlee.sysu(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |robinlee.sysu(a)gmail.com Flags| |needinfo?(moceap(a)hotmail.co | |m) --- Comment #2 from Robin Lee <robinlee.sysu(a)gmail.com> --- Any progress here? -- 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

1 0

← Newer
1
...
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
...
47
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

package-review July 2019