https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Bug ID: 976777 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-i2c - Node.js native bindings for i2c-dev Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: tchollingsworth@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org, pbrobinson@gmail.com Depends On: 976767 Blocks: 956806 (nodejs-reviews)
Spec: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/node_modules/nodejs-i2c.spec SRPM: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/node_modules/nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-1.fc19.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5527956 FAS: patches Description: Node.js native bindings for i2c-dev.
Plays well with Raspberry Pi and Beaglebone.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jamielinux@fedoraproject.or | |g Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jamielinux@fedoraproject.or | |g Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
Issues: ======= - Permissions on files are set properly. Note: See rpmlint output See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions nodejs-i2c.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/build/Release/i2c.node 0775L
Needs to be 0755.
You might also consider doing fixdep repl '~0.1.3'.
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: 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]: %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 requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/mockbuild/review/nodejs- i2c/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [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]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 4 files. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [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 %doc. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [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 [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).
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [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). [?]: 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. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Rpmlint ------- Checking: nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-1.fc20.x86_64.rpm nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dev -> deb, derv, div nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dev -> deb, derv, div nodejs-i2c.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/build/Release/i2c.node 0775L nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/underscore /usr/lib/node_modules/underscore nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/bindings /usr/lib/node_modules/bindings nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/repl /usr/lib/node_modules/repl nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/coffee-script /usr/lib/node_modules/coffee-script 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 8 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint nodejs-i2c nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dev -> deb, derv, div nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dev -> deb, derv, div nodejs-i2c.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/build/Release/i2c.node 0775L nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/underscore /usr/lib/node_modules/underscore nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/bindings /usr/lib/node_modules/bindings nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/repl /usr/lib/node_modules/repl nodejs-i2c.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/lib/node_modules/i2c/node_modules/coffee-script /usr/lib/node_modules/coffee-script 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 8 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires -------- nodejs-i2c (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) nodejs(abi) nodejs(engine) nodejs(v8-abi) npm(bindings) npm(coffee-script) npm(repl) npm(underscore) rtld(GNU_HASH)
Provides -------- nodejs-i2c: nodejs-i2c nodejs-i2c(x86-64) npm(i2c)
Source checksums ---------------- http://registry.npmjs.org/i2c/-/i2c-0.1.3.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 00a73dc0b321f2f5b51cfb70202065cb3c89e28a69a5ed8ff0b2976b2f20e7ec CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 00a73dc0b321f2f5b51cfb70202065cb3c89e28a69a5ed8ff0b2976b2f20e7ec https://raw.github.com/tchollingsworth/node-i2c/0985179d03823cab1bf3c5072bf3... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : aaadeeb0a09129793c978fbdc9610b624d4d1b1a7fe3e4d056b683845576326f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : aaadeeb0a09129793c978fbdc9610b624d4d1b1a7fe3e4d056b683845576326f
Generated by fedora-review 0.4.1 (b2e211f) last change: 2013-04-29 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -r -n nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-1.fc19.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Bug 976777 depends on bug 976767, which changed state.
Bug 976767 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-repl - A lightweight templating library for Node.js https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976767
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #2 from T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingsworth@gmail.com --- Spec: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/node_modules/nodejs-i2c.spec SRPM: http://patches.fedorapeople.org/node_modules/nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc19.src.rpm
* Wed Jun 26 2013 T.C. Hollingsworth tchollingsworth@gmail.com - 0.1.3-2 - fix permissions on shared object
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- Package approved!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: nodejs-i2c Short Description: Node.js native bindings for i2c-dev Owners: patches jamielinux Branches: f18 f19 el6 InitialCC:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc19
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc18
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.el6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2013-06-27 09:22:34
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19, nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-11523/nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18, nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-11544/nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.el6, nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2013-10606/nodejs-i2c-0....
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19, nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc19 |nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18, nodejs-i2c-0.1.3-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6,nodejs-repl-0.1.3-3.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6,nodejs-repl-0...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=976777
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|nodejs-repl-0.1.3-1.fc18 |nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- nodejs-i2c-0.1.4-3.el6, nodejs-repl-0.1.3-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla