Bug 1989300

Based on comments made on fedora-devel-list, I have changed the name to fontawesome5-fonts, and have also reorganized the contents somewhat.  New URLs:

Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/fontawesome5-fonts/fontawesome5-fonts.spec
SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/fontawesome5-fonts/fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc35.src.rpm

The package now fully complies with the font packaging guidelines.  New URLs:

Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/fontawesome5-fonts/fontawesome5-fonts.spec
SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/fontawesome5-fonts/fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc36.src.rpm

I never did a font review. Can you post the link to font packaging guidelines, please?

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/FontsPolicy/

Review tool gives me an installation error.
```
Installation errors
-------------------
INFO: mock.py version 2.12 starting (python version = 3.9.6, NVR = mock-2.12-1.fc34)...
Start: init plugins
INFO: selinux disabled
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 HW Info plugin
Mock Version: 2.12
INFO: Mock Version: 2.12
Finish: chroot init
INFO: installing package(s): /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
ERROR: Command failed: 
 # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /home/rave//fedora-34-x86_64/root/ --releasever 34 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk --disableplugin=versionlock install /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
```

see ~/fontawesome5-fonts/results/root.log
```
DEBUG util.py:444:  No matches found for the following disable plugin patterns: local, spacewalk
DEBUG util.py:446:  fedora                                           27 kB/s |  26 kB     00:00    
DEBUG util.py:446:  updates                                          36 kB/s |  19 kB     00:00    
DEBUG util.py:446:  result                                          3.0 MB/s | 3.0 kB     00:00    
DEBUG util.py:444:  Error: 
DEBUG util.py:444:   Problem: conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:444:    - nothing provides fontawesome5-brands-fonts = 5.15.4-1.fc34 needed by fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch
DEBUG util.py:444:    - nothing provides fontawesome5-free-fonts = 5.15.4-1.fc34 needed by fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch
DEBUG util.py:446:  (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages)
```

Not sure if this is an problem or a fault positive, because i can reproduce the error with my box when i install only the 3 mentioned packages. If i install all packages from result dir everything seems to run well.

```
[root@mother results]# ls
build.log
fontawesome5-brands-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.src.rpm
fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
fontawesome5-free-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
hw_info.log
installed_pkgs.log
repodata
root.log
state.log
[root@mother results]# 
[root@mother results]# 
[root@mother results]#  
[root@mother results]# dnf install fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
Last metadata expiration check: 2:39:26 ago on Fri Aug 20 12:44:06 2021.
Error: 
 Problem: conflicting requests
  - nothing provides fontawesome5-brands-fonts = 5.15.4-1.fc34 needed by fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch
  - nothing provides fontawesome5-free-fonts = 5.15.4-1.fc34 needed by fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages)
[root@mother results]# 
[root@mother results]# 
[root@mother results]# 
[root@mother results]# dnf install fontawesome5-brands-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm fontawesome5-free-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
Last metadata expiration check: 2:40:16 ago on Fri Aug 20 12:44:06 2021.
Dependencies resolved.
================================================================================
 Package                      Arch      Version           Repository       Size
================================================================================
Installing:
 fontawesome5-brands-fonts    noarch    5.15.4-1.fc34     @commandline    244 k
 fontawesome5-fonts           noarch    5.15.4-1.fc34     @commandline    566 k
 fontawesome5-fonts-all       noarch    5.15.4-1.fc34     @commandline    6.2 k
 fontawesome5-fonts-web       noarch    5.15.4-1.fc34     @commandline    716 k
 fontawesome5-free-fonts      noarch    5.15.4-1.fc34     @commandline    284 k

Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Install  5 Packages

Total size: 1.8 M
Installed size: 13 M
Is this ok [y/N]: n
Operation aborted.
```

I am also wondering that fontawesome5-brands-fonts, fontawesome5-fonts-all, fontawesome5-free-fonts are not mentioned in spec file. What magic happened here?  :)

(In reply to Wolfgang Ulbrich from comment #5)
> Review tool gives me an installation error.

[snip]

> ```
> DEBUG util.py:444:  No matches found for the following disable plugin
> patterns: local, spacewalk
> DEBUG util.py:446:  fedora                                           27 kB/s
> |  26 kB     00:00    
> DEBUG util.py:446:  updates                                          36 kB/s
> |  19 kB     00:00    
> DEBUG util.py:446:  result                                          3.0 MB/s
> | 3.0 kB     00:00    
> DEBUG util.py:444:  Error: 
> DEBUG util.py:444:   Problem: conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:444:    - nothing provides fontawesome5-brands-fonts =
> 5.15.4-1.fc34 needed by fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch
> DEBUG util.py:444:    - nothing provides fontawesome5-free-fonts =
> 5.15.4-1.fc34 needed by fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch
> DEBUG util.py:446:  (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable
> packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages)
> ```
> 
> Not sure if this is an problem or a fault positive, because i can reproduce
> the error with my box when i install only the 3 mentioned packages. If i
> install all packages from result dir everything seems to run well.

That is weird.  I don't know what fedora-review is trying to do there.  The fontawesome5-fonts-all package has "all" in the name for a reason: it depends on the other fonts.  Which were built.  So why isn't fedora-review trying to install all of them???

As you note, the packages can all be installed manually, so there is nothing wrong with the dependencies.  I don't know what happened.  It looks like a fedora-review bug to me.

> I am also wondering that fontawesome5-brands-fonts, fontawesome5-fonts-all,
> fontawesome5-free-fonts are not mentioned in spec file. What magic happened
> here?  :)

You are seeing the magic font macros at work!  The %fontpkg macro generates fontawesome5-brands-fonts and fontawesome5-free-fonts from the %global settings above (%fontfamily1, %fontsummary1, etc.), and the %fontmetapkg macro generates fontawesome5-fonts-all from the unnumbered %global settings (%fontlicense, etc.).  Down below, the %fontfiles macro generates %files sections for each of those packages.

Also, speaking of fedora-review bugs, it issues a couple of bogus complaints; see bug 1996210.

Yeah, the problem is that dnf can't resolve the dependency at repos, because missing packages aren't at repos.
I agree it is a fault by fedora-review-tool not to install all packages.

[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/fontawesome5

This is caused by fontawesome5-fonts-web sub-package which can be installed without the main package (fontawesome5-fonts), which owns the directory.
Is this the intended behavior?
If yes, than the -web sub-package needs to own the directory too
```
%files web
%doc CHANGELOG.md README* UPGRADING.md
%license LICENSE.txt
%dir %{_datadir}/fontawesome5
%{_datadir}/fontawesome5/js/
%{_datadir}/fontawesome5/sprites/
%{_datadir}/fontawesome5/svgs/
```
This silences the warning. 
Or you need to add a Requires to the -web sub-package, which pointed to the main package.

Rest looks ok ;)

I have added "%dir %{_datadir}/fontawesome5" to the web subpackage.  I updated the spec file and srpm at the URLs in comment 2.

PACKAGE IS APPROVED!



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

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


Issues:
=======


===== 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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
     upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
     licenses manually.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[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 245760 bytes in 12 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]: 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

===== 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.
[-]: 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]: 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

fonts:
[!]: Run repo-font-audit on all fonts in package.
     Note: Cannot find repo-font-audit, install fontpackages-tools package
     to make a comprehensive font review.
     See: url: undefined
[!]: Run ttname on all fonts in package.
     Note: Cannot find ttname command, install ttname package to make a
     comprehensive font review.
     See: url: undefined


Installation errors
-------------------
INFO: mock.py version 2.12 starting (python version = 3.9.6, NVR = mock-2.12-1.fc34)...
Start: init plugins
INFO: selinux disabled
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 HW Info plugin
Mock Version: 2.12
INFO: Mock Version: 2.12
Finish: chroot init
INFO: installing package(s): /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
ERROR: Command failed: 
 # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /home/rave//fedora-34-x86_64/root/ --releasever 34 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk --disableplugin=versionlock install /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm /home/rave/fontawesome5-fonts/results/fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm



Rpmlint
-------
Checking: fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
          fontawesome5-fonts-all-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
          fontawesome5-fonts-web-5.15.4-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
          fontawesome5-fonts-5.15.4-1.fc34.src.rpm
fontawesome5-fonts.noarch: W: no-documentation
fontawesome5-fonts-all.noarch: W: no-documentation
fontawesome5-fonts-web.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) javascript -> java script, java-script, JavaScript
fontawesome5-fonts-web.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US javascript -> java script, java-script, JavaScript
fontawesome5-fonts.src: W: strange-permission trademarks.py 775
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.




Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/FortAwesome/Font-Awesome/archive/5.15.4/Font-Awesome-5.15.4.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 82c301594a566277ba3cf41e037fc03ae101727d3e5d682d09e322a53937b5ed
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 82c301594a566277ba3cf41e037fc03ae101727d3e5d682d09e322a53937b5ed


Requires
--------
fontawesome5-fonts (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

fontawesome5-fonts-all (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    fontawesome5-brands-fonts
    fontawesome5-free-fonts

fontawesome5-fonts-web (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
fontawesome5-fonts:
    fontawesome5-fonts

fontawesome5-fonts-all:
    fontawesome5-fonts-all

fontawesome5-fonts-web:
    fontawesome5-fonts-web



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -r -n fontawesome5-fonts -m fedora-34-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-34-x86_64
Active plugins: fonts, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Perl, Java, Python, R, C/C++, PHP, Haskell, Ocaml, SugarActivity
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Thank you, Wolfgang.  I appreciate the review.

(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fontawesome5-fonts

Built for Rawhide and F35.