Attachment 730499 Details for Bug 927894 – fedora-review

fedora-review

review.txt (text/plain), 7.42 KB, created by Shawn Iwinski on 2013-04-01 22:05:23 UTC

(hide)

Description:

Filename:

MIME Type:

Creator: Shawn Iwinski

Created: 2013-04-01 22:05:23 UTC

Size: 7.42 KB

patch

obsolete

>Package Review
>==============
>
>Key:
>[x] = Pass
>[!] = Fail
>[-] = Not applicable
>[?] = Not evaluated
>[ ] = Manual review needed
>
>
>Issues:
>=======
>- Package installs properly.
>  Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
>  See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
>
>
>===== 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]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
>[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
>[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
>     beginning of %install.
>     Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
>     
>     EPEL 5 among target distributions.
>     
>[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
>[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
>     Note: %defattr present but not needed
>     
>     EPEL 5 among target distributions.
>     
>[-]: 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.
>[-]: 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: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
>     "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license.
>[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
>     names).
>[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
>[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
>     
>     Allowable usage for dependencies max versions.
>     
>[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.
>[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
>     Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 5 files.
>[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
>     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
>[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
>[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
>[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
>[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
>[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.
>[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]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
>     Note: No rpmlint messages.
>
>===== SHOULD items =====
>
>Generic:
>[x]: Buildroot is not present
>     Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
>     
>     EPEL 5 among target distributions.
>     
>[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).
>[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]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
>[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
>[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]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
>
>===== EXTRA items =====
>
>Generic:
>[!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
>     Note: Mock build failed
>[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.
>
>PHP:
>[x]: Run phpci static analyze on all php files.
>     Note:  Time: 9 seconds, Memory: 24.50Mb Required PHP 5.3.0 (min)
>
>
>Installation errors
>-------------------
>INFO: mock.py version 1.1.29 starting...
>Start: init plugins
>INFO: selinux enabled
>Finish: init plugins
>Start: run
>Mock Version: 1.1.29
>INFO: Mock Version: 1.1.29
>Start: lock buildroot
>INFO: installing package(s): /home/siwinski/projects/fedora/reviews/927894-php-horde-Horde-SyncMl/results/php-horde-Horde-SyncMl-2.0.3-2.fc20.noarch.rpm
>ERROR: Command failed: 
> # ['/usr/bin/yum', '--installroot', '/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/', 'install', '/home/siwinski/projects/fedora/reviews/927894-php-horde-Horde-SyncMl/results/php-horde-Horde-SyncMl-2.0.3-2.fc20.noarch.rpm', '--setopt=tsflags=nocontexts']
>Error: Package: php-horde-Horde-SyncMl-2.0.3-2.fc20.noarch (/php-horde-Horde-SyncMl-2.0.3-2.fc20.noarch)
>           Requires: php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Auth) >= 2.0.0
> You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem
> You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest
>
>
>
>Rpmlint
>-------
>Checking: php-horde-Horde-SyncMl-2.0.3-2.fc20.noarch.rpm
>1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
>
>
>
>
>Requires
>--------
>php-horde-Horde-SyncMl (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
>    /bin/sh
>    /usr/bin/env
>    /usr/bin/pear
>    php(language)
>    php-channel(pear.horde.org)
>    php-date
>    php-pcre
>    php-pear(PEAR)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Auth)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Date)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Icalendar)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Log)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Support)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Translation)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Util)
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_Xml_Wbxml)
>    php-session
>
>
>
>Provides
>--------
>php-horde-Horde-SyncMl:
>    php-horde-Horde-SyncMl
>    php-pear(pear.horde.org/Horde_SyncMl)
>
>
>
>MD5-sum check
>-------------
>http://pear.horde.org/get/Horde_SyncMl-2.0.3.tgz :
>  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : f7247ea4e4e7a1827ff8a27155b4370681af546d982e7d8fe4e17ea42e0f4e43
>  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f7247ea4e4e7a1827ff8a27155b4370681af546d982e7d8fe4e17ea42e0f4e43
>
>
>Generated by fedora-review 0.4.0 (660ce56) last change: 2013-01-29
>Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
>Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --mock-config fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 927894

Actions: View

Attachments on bug 927894: 730499 | 730500