Bug 1812435

 - Tests are failing:


+ /usr/bin/python3 test.py
......F..F.F.......F...............................
======================================================================
FAIL: test_ansi_ellipsis_mb (__main__.TableOperationsTestCase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "test.py", line 463, in test_ansi_ellipsis_mb
    self.assertEqual(string, table.get_string())
AssertionError: '+-----------------+---+------+\n| \x1b[31mこれは非常に\x1b[0m.[43 chars]---+' != '+--------------+---+------+\n| \x1b[31mこれは非常に長い\x1b[0m\x[55 chars]---+'
- +-----------------+---+------+
?  ---
+ +--------------+---+------+
- | これは非常に... | 2 | girl |
?                  ^^^
+ | これは非常に長い名前です | 2 | girl |
?              ++    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- +-----------------+---+------+?  ---
+ +--------------+---+------+
======================================================================
FAIL: test_ansi_strip_mb (__main__.TableOperationsTestCase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "test.py", line 483, in test_ansi_strip_mb
    self.assertEqual(string, table.get_string())
AssertionError: '+-----------------+---+------+\n| \x1b[31mこれは非常に長\x1b[0m[42 chars]---+' != '+--------------+---+------+\n| \x1b[31mこれは非常に長い\x1b[0m\x[55 chars]---+'
- +-----------------+---+------+
?  ---
+ +--------------+---+------+
- | これは非常に長  | 2 | girl |
?                   ^
+ | これは非常に長い名前です | 2 | girl |
?               +    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- +-----------------+---+------+?  ---
+ +--------------+---+------+
======================================================================
FAIL: test_ansi_wrap_mb (__main__.TableOperationsTestCase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "test.py", line 443, in test_ansi_wrap_mb
    self.assertEqual(string, table.get_string())
AssertionError: '+-----------------+---+------+\n| \x1b[31mこれは非常に長\x1b[0m[99 chars]---+' != '+--------------+---+------+\n| \x1b[31mこれは非常に長い\x1b[0m\x[55 chars]---+'
- +-----------------+---+------+
?  ---
+ +--------------+---+------+
- | これは非常に長  | 2 | girl |
?                   ^
+ | これは非常に長い名前です | 2 | girl |
?               +    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
- |   い名前です    |   |      |
- +-----------------+---+------+?  ---
+ +--------------+---+------+
======================================================================
FAIL: test_eastasian_characters (__main__.TableOperationsTestCase)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "test.py", line 394, in test_eastasian_characters
    self.assertEqual(string, self.table.get_string())
AssertionError: '+------------+------+--------+\n|    name    | rank [417 chars]---+' != '+----------+------+--------+\n|   name   | rank | ge[392 chars]---+'
Diff is 1112 characters long. Set self.maxDiff to None to see it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 51 tests in 0.069s
FAILED (failures=4)

https://github.com/pri22296/beautifultable/issues/86

* Thu Apr 23 2020 Fabian Affolter <mail> - 0.8.0-2
- Add missing BR for tests (rhbz#1812435)

Koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=43893083

Updated files:
Spec URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-beautifultable.spec
SRPM URL: https://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/python-beautifultable-0.8.0-2.fc31.src.rpm

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License", "*No copyright* Expat
     License". 31 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/mohamed/Documents/1812435-python-
     beautifultable/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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
[-]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 1 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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[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]: 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
     provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     python3-beautifultable
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: 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.
[?]: 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:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
     attached diff).
     See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-beautifultable-0.8.0-2.fc33.noarch.rpm
          python-beautifultable-doc-0.8.0-2.fc33.noarch.rpm
          python-beautifultable-0.8.0-2.fc33.src.rpm
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb backend.
warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb backend.
python-beautifultable-doc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/pri22296/beautifultable <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
-> False positive? (URL is OK)
warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb backend.
python3-beautifultable.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/pri22296/beautifultable <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/pri22296/beautifultable/archive/v0.8.0/beautifultable-0.8.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : f50edea207bc271e8e9d5d0e7244913d60b2a8fbd27c0f2c67bd5adc8cae83a3
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f50edea207bc271e8e9d5d0e7244913d60b2a8fbd27c0f2c67bd5adc8cae83a3


Requires
--------
python3-beautifultable (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)

python-beautifultable-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
python3-beautifultable:
    python-beautifultable
    python3-beautifultable
    python3.9-beautifultable
    python3.9dist(beautifultable)
    python3dist(beautifultable)

python-beautifultable-doc:
    python-beautifultable-doc



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/mohamed/Documents/1812435-python-beautifultable/srpm/python-beautifultable.spec	2020-06-04 09:36:52.536066379 +0200
+++ /home/mohamed/Documents/1812435-python-beautifultable/srpm-unpacked/python-beautifultable.spec	2020-04-23 07:43:58.000000000 +0200
@@ -82,5 +82,5 @@
 %changelog
 * Thu Apr 23 2020 Fabian Affolter <mail> - 0.8.0-2
-- Add missing BR for tests (rhbz#1812435)
+- Add missing BR for tests (rhbz#)
 
 * Wed Mar 11 2020 Fabian Affolter <mail> - 0.8.0-1


Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1812435 -P python
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python
Disabled plugins: Haskell, R, Perl, SugarActivity, Java, PHP, C/C++, Ocaml, fonts
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH


NOTES:
- no significant difference the spec URL and the one in the src.rpm file
- you should maybe use a macro for package description, to avoid text duplication

This package is APPROVED

Thanks for the review.

(In reply to Mohamed El Morabity from comment #4)
> NOTES:
> - no significant difference the spec URL and the one in the src.rpm file

I will upload a new SRPM. Looks like that I added the bug after the upload.

> - you should maybe use a macro for package description, to avoid text
> duplication

I don't like it as it's additional work if you want to re-use the description outside of the spec file. Also, some day we can get hopefully get rid of the underlaying issue.

(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-beautifultable

FEDORA-2020-e0c4437267 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e0c4437267

FEDORA-2020-e0c4437267 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-e0c4437267 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e0c4437267

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2020-22b9b5930f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-22b9b5930f

FEDORA-EPEL-2020-c459a8024e has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-c459a8024e

FEDORA-2020-22b9b5930f has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-22b9b5930f \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-22b9b5930f

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-EPEL-2020-c459a8024e has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-c459a8024e

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

python-beautifultable-0.8.0-2.fc32 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

python-beautifultable-0.8.0-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

FEDORA-EPEL-2020-c459a8024e has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.