Attachment 696433 Details for Bug 909671 – review.txt

review.txt

libexif-gtk-review.txt (text/plain), 10.33 KB, created by Remi Collet on 2013-02-12 09:36:58 UTC

(hide)

Description:

Filename:

MIME Type:

Creator: Remi Collet

Created: 2013-02-12 09:36:58 UTC

Size: 10.33 KB

patch

obsolete

>
>Package Review
>==============
>
>Key:
>[x] = Pass
>[!] = Fail
>[-] = Not applicable
>[?] = Not evaluated
>[ ] = Manual review needed
>
>
>==== ISSUES ====
>
>[!] (with incorrect FSF address)
>	Please this upstream, and add link to bug report
>
>[!]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
>	Sources refers as 0.3.6, but as this version is not yet
>	released, this is a pre version
>	Release: 0.2.%{snapver}%{?dist}
>
>[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
>	Drop Requires: pkgconfig
>
>[!]: rpmlint
>	Drop empty AUTHORS file
>
>	$ rpmlint -I unused-direct-shlib-dependency
>	unused-direct-shlib-dependency:
>	The binary contains unused direct shared library dependencies.  This may
>	indicate gratuitously bloated linkage; check that the binary has been linked
>	with the intended shared libraries only.
>
>
>===== MUST items =====
>
>C/C++:
>[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
>[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
>[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
>[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
>[x]: Package contains no static executables.
>[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
>[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
>
>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]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
>     supported primary architecture.
>[x]: %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.
>[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
>[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
>[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
>     beginning of %install.
>[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
>[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
>[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
>[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
>[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
>[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
>[?]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
>[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
>[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
>[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
>[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
>     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in %package
>     devel
>[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
>[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
>[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.
>[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
>     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
>     "LGPL (v2.1 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2 or later)
>     (with incorrect FSF address)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have
>     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
>     /home/extras/SPECS/review/909671-libexif-gtk/licensecheck.txt
>[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
>[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
>[x]: 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.
>[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
>     Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
>[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
>[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]: Package installs properly.
>[x]: 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.
>[x]: 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.
>[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
>[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
>     Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 5 files.
>[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
>
>===== SHOULD items =====
>
>Generic:
>[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)
>[-]: 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.
>[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
>     --requires).
>[?]: Package functions as described.
>[x]: Latest version is packaged.
>[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
>[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
>[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
>[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
>     Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
>[x]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
>[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
>[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]: 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.
>[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
>     arched.
>
>
>Rpmlint
>-------
>Checking: libexif-gtk-devel-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm
>          libexif-gtk-debuginfo-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm
>          libexif-gtk-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm
>          libexif-gtk-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.src.rpm
>libexif-gtk-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) nÃ©cÃ©ssaires -> nÃ©cessaires
>libexif-gtk-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l fr nÃ©cÃ©ssaires -> nÃ©cessaires
>libexif-gtk-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/libexif-gtk-0.3.6/AUTHORS
>libexif-gtk.src: W: invalid-url Source0: libexif-gtk-0.3.6-20130210cvs.tar.xz
>4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
>
>
>
>
>Rpmlint (installed packages)
>----------------------------
># rpmlint libexif-gtk libexif-gtk-devel libexif-gtk-debuginfo
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found fr
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libatk-1.0.so.0
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libgio-2.0.so.0
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libpangoft2-1.0.so.0
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libpangocairo-1.0.so.0
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libcairo.so.2
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libpango-1.0.so.0
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libfreetype.so.6
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libfontconfig.so.1
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libexif-gtk.so.5.1.0 /lib64/libpthread.so.0
>libexif-gtk.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/libexif-gtk-0.3.6/AUTHORS
>libexif-gtk-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
>3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 11 warnings.
># echo 'rpmlint-done:'
>
>
>
>Requires
>--------
>libexif-gtk-devel-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
>    
>    /usr/bin/pkg-config  
>    gtk2-devel(x86-64)  
>    libexif-devel(x86-64)  
>    libexif-gtk(x86-64) = 0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19
>    libexif-gtk.so.5()(64bit)  
>    pkgconfig  
>    pkgconfig(libexif)  
>
>libexif-gtk-debuginfo-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
>    
>
>libexif-gtk-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
>    
>    /sbin/ldconfig  
>    libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libc.so.6()(64bit)  
>    libcairo.so.2()(64bit)  
>    libexif.so.12()(64bit)  
>    libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)  
>    libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)  
>    libgdk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libpangoft2-1.0.so.0()(64bit)  
>    libpthread.so.0()(64bit)  
>    rtld(GNU_HASH)  
>
>
>
>Provides
>--------
>libexif-gtk-devel-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm:
>    
>    libexif-gtk-devel = 0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19
>    libexif-gtk-devel(x86-64) = 0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19
>    pkgconfig(libexif-gtk) = 0.3.6cvs3
>
>libexif-gtk-debuginfo-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm:
>    
>    libexif-gtk-debuginfo = 0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19
>    libexif-gtk-debuginfo(x86-64) = 0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19
>
>libexif-gtk-0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19.x86_64.rpm:
>    
>    libexif-gtk = 0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19
>    libexif-gtk(x86-64) = 0.3.6-2.20130210cvs.fc19
>    libexif-gtk.so.5()(64bit)  
>
>
>
>MD5-sum check
>-------------
>
>
>Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16
>Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
>Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 909671

Actions: View

Attachments on bug 909671: 696433 | 736256 | 736257