https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
Bug ID: 1322662 Summary: Review Request: cvs2svn - CVS to SVN/GIT/BZR repository converter Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: stuart@gathman.org QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: http://gathman.org/linux/SPECS/cvs2svn.spec SRPM URL: http://gathman.org/linux/f23/src/cvs2svn-2.4.0-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: cvs2svn is a Python script that converts a CVS repository to a Subversion repository. It is designed for one-time conversions, not for repeated synchronizations between CVS and Subversion. Add-on packages also support conversion to git and bazaar (and soon mercurial).
Fedora Account System Username: sdgathman
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #1 from Stuart D Gathman stuart@gathman.org --- Yes, I need a patch to get rid of the #!/usr/bin/env in several of the scripts. Just wanted to get the review request out there while I test the functionality with 2.4.0
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #2 from Stuart D Gathman stuart@gathman.org --- This is a cleaned up version of the orphaned cvs2svn package.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #3 from Stuart D Gathman stuart@gathman.org --- cvs2git-2.3 and cvs2svn-2.3 are in Fedora22, but orphaned. I am using cvs2git-2.4 from this package on Fedora23 and EL7.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
Watson Yuuma Sato wsato@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |wsato@redhat.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |wsato@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
Watson Yuuma Sato wsato@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #4 from Watson Yuuma Sato wsato@redhat.com --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues: ======= - Package does not use a name that already exists. Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/cvs2svn See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Packag...
Not an issue, as it is unretiring a package.
- License field is not accurate, files in svntest/ have Apache license
- rpmlint issues -- shebang should be removed from python library files -- remove env from shebang in cvs2svn_lib/main.py and cvs2svn_lib/version.py files
===== MUST items =====
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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 128 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/wsato/review/1322662-cvs2svn/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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]: 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 215040 bytes in 11 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 must own all directories that it creates. [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]: 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 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
Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [-]: 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in cvs2commons , cvs2git , cvs2bzr [x]: 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: [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: cvs2svn-2.4.0-1.fc26.noarch.rpm cvs2commons-2.4.0-1.fc26.noarch.rpm cvs2git-2.4.0-1.fc26.noarch.rpm cvs2bzr-2.4.0-1.fc26.noarch.rpm cvs2svn-2.4.0-1.fc26.src.rpm cvs2commons.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/generate_blobs.py /usr/bin/env python -u cvs2commons.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/generate_blobs.py 644 /usr/bin/env python -u cvs2commons.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/main.py /usr/bin/env python cvs2commons.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/version.py /usr/bin/env python 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- cvs2commons.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/generate_blobs.py /usr/bin/env python -u cvs2commons.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/generate_blobs.py 644 /usr/bin/env python -u cvs2commons.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/main.py /usr/bin/env python cvs2commons.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/cvs2svn_lib/version.py /usr/bin/env python 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings.
Requires -------- cvs2commons (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/env /usr/bin/python cvs python(abi) rcs
cvs2svn (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 cvs2commons subversion
cvs2bzr (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 bzr bzr-fastimport cvs2commons
cvs2git (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 cvs2commons git
Provides -------- cvs2commons: cvs2commons python2.7dist(cvs2svn) python2dist(cvs2svn)
cvs2svn: cvs2svn
cvs2bzr: cvs2bzr
cvs2git: cvs2git
Source checksums ---------------- http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/files/documents/1462/49237/cvs2svn-2.4.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a6677fc3e7b4374020185c61c998209d691de0c1b01b53e59341057459f6f116 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a6677fc3e7b4374020185c61c998209d691de0c1b01b53e59341057459f6f116
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1322662 --mock-config fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #5 from Stuart D Gathman stuart@gathman.org --- Thanks. Looks like it might be simple to fix the two nits.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #6 from Stuart D Gathman stuart@gathman.org --- The 128 "UNKNOWN" license files actually say:
# This software is licensed as described in the file COPYING, which ...
Does this need a patch? Seems clear enough for me.
I updated License to include the ASL 2.0 license used in svntest.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #7 from Stuart D Gathman stuart@gathman.org --- Spec URL: http://gathman.org/linux/SPECS/cvs2svn.spec SRPM URL: http://gathman.org/linux/f24/src/cvs2svn-2.4.0-2.fc24.src.rpm
cvs2svn, and the other subpackages depend on the cvs2commons subpackage. I added fully versioned dependencies, but renaming the package to cvs2commons doesn't seem right.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #8 from Stuart D Gathman stuart@gathman.org --- Added a %check section, but commented out because svntest fails - but seems to be due to out of date test code.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322662
--- Comment #9 from Watson Yuuma Sato wsato@redhat.com --- Hello, sorry for late follow-up.
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
As the package is noarch, the Requires for cvs2commons should be without architecture, like: cvs2commons = %{version}-%{release}
- Package does not use a name that already exists. Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/cvs2svn See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Packag...
Not an issue, as it is unretiring a package.
- rpmlint warning There is a warning about a commented macro in the added %check section. It is optional to fix, in my opinion.
===== MUST items =====
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", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 128 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [-]: 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]: 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 215040 bytes in 11 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]: 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]: 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 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
Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
===== 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in cvs2commons , cvs2git , cvs2bzr [x]: 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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.3.4 starting (python version = 3.5.3)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 1.3.4 INFO: Mock Version: 1.3.4 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2git-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2svn-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2bzr-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2commons-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 27 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2git-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2svn-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2bzr-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/wsato/rereview/1322662-cvs2svn/results/cvs2commons-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts
Rpmlint ------- Checking: cvs2svn-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm cvs2commons-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm cvs2git-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm cvs2bzr-2.4.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm cvs2svn-2.4.0-2.fc27.src.rpm cvs2svn.src:84: W: macro-in-comment %{__python2} 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Requires -------- cvs2commons (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 cvs python(abi) rcs
cvs2svn (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 cvs2commons(x86-64) subversion
cvs2bzr (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 bzr bzr-fastimport cvs2commons(x86-64)
cvs2git (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 cvs2commons(x86-64) git
Provides -------- cvs2commons: cvs2commons python2.7dist(cvs2svn) python2dist(cvs2svn)
cvs2svn: cvs2svn
cvs2bzr: cvs2bzr
cvs2git: cvs2git
Source checksums ---------------- http://cvs2svn.tigris.org/files/documents/1462/49237/cvs2svn-2.4.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a6677fc3e7b4374020185c61c998209d691de0c1b01b53e59341057459f6f116 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a6677fc3e7b4374020185c61c998209d691de0c1b01b53e59341057459f6f116
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1322662 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com -
Red Hat Bugzilla