| Summary: | Review Request: gap-pkg-automata - Finite automata algorithms | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jerry James <loganjerry> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | gil cattaneo <puntogil> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | package-review, puntogil |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | puntogil:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2016-09-05 17:52:59 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Jerry James
2016-08-27 18:58:31 UTC
hi Jerry have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1370868 or this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1370913 ? i take this in return thanks in advance Hi gil. Sure, I'll take one of those. I probably won't have time to review it for a day or two, though. I'll start as soon as I can. Thanks! Package Review ============== Legend: [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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 18 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1370874 -gap-pkg-automata/licensecheck.txt [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. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [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. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 3 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]: 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]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [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. [x]: %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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.20 starting (python version = 3.5.1)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata Mock Version: 1.2.20 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.20 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/gil/1370874-gap-pkg-automata/results/gap-pkg-automata-1.13-1.fc26.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/root/ --releasever 26 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/gil/1370874-gap-pkg-automata/results/gap-pkg-automata-1.13-1.fc26.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: gap-pkg-automata-1.13-1.fc26.noarch.rpm gap-pkg-automata-1.13-1.fc26.src.rpm gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US minimalize -> minimalism, minimize, criminalize gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/lib/gap/pkg/automata/doc/gapdoc.dtd gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/lib/gap/pkg/automata/doc/gapdoc.css gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-automata/README gap-pkg-automata.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US minimalize -> minimalism, minimize, criminalize 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Requires -------- gap-pkg-automata (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gap-core graphviz xdg-open Provides -------- gap-pkg-automata: gap-pkg-automata Source checksums ---------------- http://cmup.fc.up.pt/cmup/mdelgado/automata/automata-1.13.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d9f878401bd3f01c16a370ca5a953209808b59bbdf2e4d0e079f7b9830e1e756 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d9f878401bd3f01c16a370ca5a953209808b59bbdf2e4d0e079f7b9830e1e756 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1370874 -m fedora-rawhide-i386 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 Please, fix these hints before import gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/lib/gap/pkg/automata/doc/gapdoc.dtd gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/lib/gap/pkg/automata/doc/gapdoc.css gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-automata/README Approved (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4) > Please, fix these hints before import > > gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 > /usr/lib/gap/pkg/automata/doc/gapdoc.dtd > gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 > /usr/lib/gap/pkg/automata/doc/gapdoc.css Hmm, I think those two files should not be packaged at all. I will remove them. > gap-pkg-automata.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > /usr/share/doc/gap-pkg-automata/README Fixed. > Approved Thank you very much for the review! Again! :-) Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/gap-pkg-automata gap-pkg-automata-1.13-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-5827571429 gap-pkg-automata-1.13-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-d2daee767e gap-pkg-automata-1.13-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-5827571429 gap-pkg-automata-1.13-2.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-5827571429 gap-pkg-automata-1.13-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-d2daee767e gap-pkg-automata-1.13-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-5827571429 gap-pkg-automata-1.13-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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-2016-d2daee767e gap-pkg-automata-1.13-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. gap-pkg-automata-1.13-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |