Bug 1977535
Summary: | Review Request: python-howdoi - Instant coding answers via the command line | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Michel Lind <michel> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Davide Cavalca <davide> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | davide, package-review |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | davide:
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: | 2021-07-10 00:48:48 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 1977534 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Michel Lind
2021-06-30 00:57:08 UTC
Taking this review Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License". 121 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/1977534-python-keep/upstream/1977535-python- howdoi/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. Note: Macros in: python3-howdoi (description) [-]: 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. [x]: 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 2 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]: 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]: 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: [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. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [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: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_use_rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 2.11 starting (python version = 3.9.5, NVR = mock-2.11-1.fc34)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins INFO: Signal handler active Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled package manager cache Start: cleaning package manager metadata Finish: cleaning package manager metadata INFO: enabled ccache INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 2.11 INFO: Mock Version: 2.11 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /tmp/1977534-python-keep/upstream/1977535-python-howdoi/results/python3-howdoi-2.0.16-1.fc35.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed: # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 35 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk install /tmp/1977534-python-keep/upstream/1977535-python-howdoi/results/python3-howdoi-2.0.16-1.fc35.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-howdoi-2.0.16-1.fc35.noarch.rpm python-howdoi-2.0.16-1.fc35.src.rpm python3-howdoi.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/howdoi/howdoi.py 644 /usr/bin/env python python3-howdoi.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary howdoi 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/gleitz/howdoi/archive/v2.0.16/howdoi-2.0.16.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e32d6bce31f27862bf23007638a78ea6727ed325e863e3ea8e3b7b377f603bbf CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e32d6bce31f27862bf23007638a78ea6727ed325e863e3ea8e3b7b377f603bbf Requires -------- python3-howdoi (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python3.10dist(appdirs) python3.10dist(cachelib) python3.10dist(cssselect) python3.10dist(keep) python3.10dist(lxml) python3.10dist(pygments) python3.10dist(pyquery) python3.10dist(requests) Provides -------- python3-howdoi: python-howdoi python3-howdoi python3.10-howdoi python3.10dist(howdoi) python3dist(howdoi) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1977535 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, C/C++, R, Perl, PHP, Ocaml, Java, fonts, Haskell Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH - escape the % in the description so it doesn't get parsed as a macro - rpmlint complains about: python3-howdoi.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/howdoi/howdoi.py 644 /usr/bin/env python you probably need to remove the shebang (and ideally send a PR upstream) - pytest supports excluding tests (https://docs.pytest.org/en/6.2.x/example/pythoncollection.html), can we do that instead of patching them? (In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #3) > - escape the % in the description so it doesn't get parsed as a macro ack > - rpmlint complains about: > python3-howdoi.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/howdoi/howdoi.py 644 /usr/bin/env python > you probably need to remove the shebang (and ideally send a PR upstream) will do > - pytest supports excluding tests > (https://docs.pytest.org/en/6.2.x/example/pythoncollection.html), can we do > that instead of patching them? right, was thinking of doing that. it will add a dependency on pytest (for the annotations) but if upstream doesn't want to take it we can just carry it ourselves oh, we don't even need that with `--deselect`. duh. Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/python/python-howdoi.spec SRPM URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/python/python-howdoi-2.0.16-2.fc33.src.rpm - Escape \%s in description - Use `--deselect` to temporarily skip expensive tests Approved, but please also fix the shebang. yup, and acutally fix the escape properly $ fedpkg request-repo python-howdoi 1977535 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/35417 (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-howdoi FEDORA-2021-84a5d956c1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-84a5d956c1 FEDORA-2021-535d01eecb has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-535d01eecb FEDORA-2021-84a5d956c1 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-84a5d956c1 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-84a5d956c1 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. FEDORA-2021-535d01eecb has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-535d01eecb \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-535d01eecb See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. FEDORA-2021-535d01eecb has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. FEDORA-2021-84a5d956c1 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. |