https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Bug ID: 1519324 Summary: Review Request: onedrive - OneDrive Free Client written in D Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sztsian@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86... SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86... Description: OneDrive Free Client written in D Fedora Account System Username: zsun
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Iwicki Artur fedora@svgames.pl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fedora@svgames.pl
--- Comment #1 from Iwicki Artur fedora@svgames.pl ---
Group: Applications/Internet
The "Group:" tag should not be used. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections
I think this should use the %{repo} macro declared at the start of the spec.
This do not support OneDrive for business
Broken grammar. "This does not support OneDrive For Business", or maybe "OneDrive For Business is not supported".
sed -i 's//usr/local//usr/' Makefile
Sed allows to use any character as the regex delimiter; if you use something else than the slash (e.g. a pipe "|"), you won't have to escape every slash.
Also, you either forgot to roll the "Release:" tag back to 1, or there's a missing changelog entry for 1.0.1-2.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #2 from Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com --- Thanks for the review. Yes I forget to merge some changes before I push to cpor. Here is the fixed version: SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86... SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Robin Lee robinlee.sysu@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |robinlee.sysu@gmail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |robinlee.sysu@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #3 from Robin Lee robinlee.sysu@gmail.com --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. %{_d_optflags} should be used: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:D [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. [!]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). /usr should be replaced with %_prefix. [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. [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 10240 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 %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 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. [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. [!]: %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 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. [!]: Follow ldc.spec to add 'ExclusiveArch: %{ldc_arches}'
Rpmlint ------- Checking: onedrive-1.0.1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm onedrive-debuginfo-1.0.1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm onedrive-1.0.1-1.fc28.src.rpm onedrive.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C OneDrive onedrive.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary onedrive onedrive.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C OneDrive 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: onedrive-debuginfo-1.0.1-1.fc28.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory onedrive.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C OneDrive onedrive.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary onedrive 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Requires -------- onedrive-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
onedrive (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcurl.so.4()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libdruntime-ldc.so.74()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libphobos2-ldc.so.74()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) systemd
Provides -------- onedrive-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) onedrive-debuginfo onedrive-debuginfo(x86-64)
onedrive: onedrive onedrive(x86-64)
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/skilion/onedrive/archive/v1.0.1/onedrive-v1.0.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e862c2d9d65fc11cc2befbfd8d0065a08821e723cbcfe16943a5b2215bc9caf8 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e862c2d9d65fc11cc2befbfd8d0065a08821e723cbcfe16943a5b2215bc9caf8
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1519324 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #4 from Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com --- Thanks. Here is the fix. SPEC URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86... SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #5 from Robin Lee robinlee.sysu@gmail.com --- [!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. %{_d_optflags} should be used: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:D This was not fixed. From build.log:
+ export 'DFLAGS=-release -w -g -O1' + DFLAGS='-release -w -g -O1' + /usr/bin/make -O -j6 sed "s|@PREFIX@|/usr|g" onedrive.service.in > onedrive.service ldmd2 -g -inline -O -release -ofonedrive -L-lcurl -L-lsqlite3 -L-ldl -J. src/config.d src/itemdb.d src/log.d src/main.d src/monitor.d src/onedrive.d src/qxor.d src/selective.d src/sqlite.d src/sync.d src/upload.d src/util.d
DFLAGS seems not actually honored.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #6 from Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com --- Oh, right. I guess it is also hard-coded in Makefile. I'll look into the Makefile later.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #7 from Zamir SUN sztsian@gmail.com --- SPEC URL : https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86... SRPM URL : https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/test/fedora-rawhide-x86...
Now DFLAGS would be honoured by adding it at the end of hard-coded flags.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Robin Lee robinlee.sysu@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Robin Lee robinlee.sysu@gmail.com --- This package is approved by cheeselee.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #9 from Gwyn Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/onedrive
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- onedrive-1.0.1-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-231ad7ab63
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- onedrive-1.0.1-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-231ad7ab63
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2018-01-31 16:57:07
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- onedrive-1.0.1-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1519324
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) CC| |thom@sfedb.com
--- Comment #13 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- *** Bug 1546985 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com