Attachment 630488 Details for Bug 866370 – fedora review output

fedora review output

php-channel-theseer-review.txt (text/plain), 6.82 KB, created by Johan Cwiklinski on 2012-10-20 16:58:01 UTC

(hide)

Description:

Filename:

MIME Type:

Creator: Johan Cwiklinski

Created: 2012-10-20 16:58:01 UTC

Size: 6.82 KB

patch

obsolete

>
>Package Review
>==============
>
>Key:
>[x] = Pass
>[!] = Fail
>[-] = Not applicable
>[?] = Not evaluated
>[ ] = Manual review needed
>
>
>Issues:
>=======
>[!]: Package requires php-common instead of php.
>See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PHP
>[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
>     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
>     found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
>See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#ValidLicenseShortNames
>
>
>===== MUST items =====
>
>Generic:
>[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
>     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
>     Guidelines.
>[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
>     supported primary architecture.
>[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
>[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
>     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
>[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
>[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
>[ ]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
>     beginning of %install.
>     Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
>[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
>[ ]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
>     Note: %defattr present but not needed
>[ ]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
>[ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
>[ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
>[ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
>[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
>[ ]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
>[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
>[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
>[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
>[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
>[ ]: Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
>[ ]: 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.
>[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
>     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
>     found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
>[ ]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
>     names).
>[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
>[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
>[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
>     Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
>[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
>[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
>[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
>     Provides are present.
>[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
>[ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
>[x]: Package installs properly.
>[ ]: Package is not relocatable.
>[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
>[x]: CheckResultdir
>[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
>     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
>[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
>     in the spec URL.
>[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
>[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
>     %{name}.spec.
>[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
>[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
>
>PHP:
>[!]: Package requires php-common instead of php.
>
>===== SHOULD items =====
>
>Generic:
>[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
>[ ]: Buildroot is not present
>     Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
>[ ]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
>     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
>     Note: %clean present but not required
>[ ]: 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]: Dist tag is present.
>[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
>[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
>     --requires).
>[ ]: Package functions as described.
>[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
>[ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
>[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
>[ ]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
>[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
>[!]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
>     Note: Source0 (channel.xml)
>[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
>[ ]: 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.
>[ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
>[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
>
>===== 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: php-channel-theseer-1.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
>          php-channel-theseer-1.3-1.fc17.src.rpm
>php-channel-theseer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US netpirates -> net pirates, net-pirates, penetrates
>php-channel-theseer.noarch: W: no-documentation
>php-channel-theseer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US netpirates -> net pirates, net-pirates, penetrates
>php-channel-theseer.src:24: W: unversioned-explicit-provides php-channel(%{channel})
>2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
>
>
>
>
>Rpmlint (installed packages)
>----------------------------
># rpmlint php-channel-theseer
>php-channel-theseer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US netpirates -> net pirates, net-pirates, penetrates
>php-channel-theseer.noarch: W: no-documentation
>1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
># echo 'rpmlint-done:'
>
>
>
>Requires
>--------
>php-channel-theseer-1.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
>    
>    /bin/sh  
>    /usr/bin/pear  
>    php-pear(PEAR)  
>
>
>
>Provides
>--------
>php-channel-theseer-1.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm:
>    
>    php-channel(pear.netpirates.net)  
>    php-channel-theseer = 1.3-1.fc17
>
>
>
>MD5-sum check
>-------------
>http://pear.netpirates.net/channel.xml :
>  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : a688d26f87598465f62ef2b60ea8bad48f558a5f79d1acaadf31cdeb0d6bed7f
>  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a688d26f87598465f62ef2b60ea8bad48f558a5f79d1acaadf31cdeb0d6bed7f
>
>
>Generated by fedora-review 0.3.0 (c78e275) last change: 2012-09-24
>Buildroot used: fedora-17-x86_64
>Command line :/bin/fedora-review -b 866370

Actions: View

Attachments on bug 866370: 630488