https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
Bug ID: 1485723 Summary: Review Request: deepin-image-viewer - Deepin Image Viewer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sensor.wen@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-26-x8...
SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-26-x8...
Description: Deepin Image Viewer
Fedora Account System Username: mosquito
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
sensor.wen@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1465889 | |(DeepinDEPackageReview)
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1465889 [Bug 1465889] Tracking: Deepin Desktop related package review tracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |zebob.m@gmail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |zebob.m@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- Hello,
- You need to validate the desktop file:
BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils
%check desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
- You need a Require for hicolors icons:
Requires: hicolor-icon-theme
- It would be nice to provide an appdata.xml. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData for how to create one.
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
Issues: ======= - Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file.
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "Unicode strict". 1080 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review /deepin-image-viewer/review-deepin-image-viewer/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/icons/deepin/apps/scalable, /usr/share/dman [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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]: 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]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in deepin-image-viewer [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in deepin-image-viewer [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 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 contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in deepin- image-viewer-debuginfo [?]: 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]: 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 4505600 bytes in /usr/share [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: deepin-image-viewer-1.2.15-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm deepin-image-viewer-debuginfo-1.2.15-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm deepin-image-viewer-1.2.15-1.fc28.src.rpm deepin-image-viewer.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id deepin-image-viewer.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id deepin-image-viewer.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deepin-image-viewer deepin-image-viewer-debuginfo.x86_64: E: useless-provides debuginfo(build-id) 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
--- Comment #2 from sensor.wen@gmail.com --- SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-26-x8... SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/mosquito/deepin/fedora-26-x8...
Add appdata.xml and test suit.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
--- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/deepin-image-viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- All good, package accepted.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sztsian@gmail.com Alias| |deepin-image-viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2018-07-22 09:32:28
--- Comment #5 from Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com --- This is already in Rawhide. Closing on behalf of the Deepin Desktop packaging effort.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1485723
--- Comment #6 from Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com --- This is already in Rawhide. Closing on behalf of the Deepin Desktop packaging effort.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com