Bug 2424814

Hello, 

As part of my Fedora packager sponsorship process, this is my mock review using the original .spec and .src.rpm files submitted in this Bugzilla.

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

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


Issues:
=======
- The license file should be present in all sub-packages that don't depends on the main package
- %{_includedir} should be used for line "ln -s /usr/include/jsmn/jsmn.h jsmn/jsmn.h" 
- Why libasan and libubsan are required?
- autoreconf should be put in the %prep section because it prepare the files for configure
- "All patches in Fedora spec files SHOULD have a comment above them about their upstream status"
- Enumerates patches, use Patch0:, Patch1:, ... instead of Patch:
- load_dwg.py should be moved in the python3-LibreDWG?
- if bindings are useful why use conditional build for them and not enabled them by default?
- to avoid changing every time the %{_libdir}/libredwg.so.0.0.13 line in %{_libdir}/libredwg.so.0{,.*} 
- remove extra white and the end of the line 72.
- %make_build check should be used instead of make check in order execute tests in parallel
- pcre2-devel is already specified as build dependency so there is no need to specificy also pcre2

===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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.
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries
     with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[!]: 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.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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.
[!]: 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.
[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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[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]: 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.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
     Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1187840 bytes in /usr/share
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libredwg-0.13.3-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm
          libredwg-devel-0.13.3-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm
          libredwg-0.13.3-1.fc45.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpqloanllo')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('dxf', '%description -l en_US dxf -> def')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('json', '%description -l en_US json -> son, j son, soon')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('rewriter', '%description -l en_US rewriter -> rewrite, rewrites, re writer')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('saveas', "%description -l en_US saveas -> saves, savers, save's")
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('dwggrep', '%description -l en_US dwggrep -> grepped')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('dwglayer', '%description -l en_US dwglayer -> waylayer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dxf', '%description -l en_US dxf -> def')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('json', '%description -l en_US json -> son, j son, soon')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rewriter', '%description -l en_US rewriter -> rewrite, rewrites, re writer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('saveas', "%description -l en_US saveas -> saves, savers, save's")
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dwglayer', '%description -l en_US dwglayer -> waylayer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/libredwg/load_dwg.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 12 errors, 0 warnings, 60 filtered, 12 badness; has taken 1.8 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: libredwg-debuginfo-0.13.3-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp6h18zyj5')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 33 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 2.4 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 3

libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dxf', '%description -l en_US dxf -> def')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('json', '%description -l en_US json -> son, j son, soon')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rewriter', '%description -l en_US rewriter -> rewrite, rewrites, re writer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('saveas', "%description -l en_US saveas -> saves, savers, save's")
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dwglayer', '%description -l en_US dwglayer -> waylayer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/libredwg/load_dwg.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 0 warnings, 101 filtered, 6 badness; has taken 3.1 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/libredwg/libredwg-0.13.3.tar.xz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 83f1f6e78a744777a481ff4520e4cef3f8ac4b2c1c25671077ca12fe81e8816e
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 83f1f6e78a744777a481ff4520e4cef3f8ac4b2c1c25671077ca12fe81e8816e
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/libredwg/libredwg-0.13.3.tar.xz.sig :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 64f6a5a30f47c830399a6ab860d2b59d9b322bbb5aec794710864ea290ddac09
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 64f6a5a30f47c830399a6ab860d2b59d9b322bbb5aec794710864ea290ddac09
Using local file /home/fabio/fedora/libredwg/2895a881d34270fabfe8f747b4f63339e65d6414.asc as upstream
file:///home/fabio/fedora/libredwg/2895a881d34270fabfe8f747b4f63339e65d6414.asc :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 65e5679b1860449b4aad0a4ec26a3225454c591db77d966f4a67ede9c423360f
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 65e5679b1860449b4aad0a4ec26a3225454c591db77d966f4a67ede9c423360f


Requires
--------
libredwg (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/sh
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libmimalloc.so.2()(64bit)
    libpcre2-16.so.0()(64bit)
    libpcre2-16.so.0(PCRE2_10.47)(64bit)
    libpcre2-8.so.0()(64bit)
    libpcre2-8.so.0(PCRE2_10.47)(64bit)
    libps.so.0()(64bit)
    libredwg.so.0()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libredwg-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    libredwg(x86-64)
    libredwg.so.0()(64bit)



Provides
--------
libredwg:
    libredwg
    libredwg(x86-64)
    libredwg.so.0()(64bit)

libredwg-devel:
    libredwg-devel
    libredwg-devel(x86-64)
    pkgconfig(libredwg)



Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2424814
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, Haskell, R, Python, Perl, fonts, Ocaml, Java, SugarActivity
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

A few comments:

> # disable bindings for now as python does not have
> # have metadata and some perl tests fail

Duplicated word 'have'.

> BuildRequires:  mimalloc-devel

Is this really required?
The README states:

> - libmimalloc: faster memory allocation, but usually not worth the hassle.

> BuildRequires:  libasan
> BuildRequires:  libubsan

Are they used in the test suite?

> rm jsmn/jsmn.h
> ln -s /usr/include/jsmn/jsmn.h jsmn/jsmn.h

The symlink is superfluous, because the compiler will consult probe /usr/include and find there jsmn/jsmn.h as well.

> # Json reader tests give errors
> Patch:          json-test.patch

It seems the patch thus disables JSON and a few other tests.
In that case a comment to that extend would be useful.

> # Downloaded from Ubuntu Keyserver
> # https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=2895A881D34270FABFE8F747B4F63339E65D6414&fingerprint=on&op=index
> Source2:        2895a881d34270fabfe8f747b4f63339e65d6414.asc

The official keyring of the gnu project is: 
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-keyring.gpg

Hence perhaps it makes sense to reference that.

> %{_infodir}/LibreDWG.info*

The manual appears to be licensed under the GFDL. Does the .spec license tag cares about documentation licenses?


Apparently, the compile/check is a bit memory hungry, i.e. it killed my VM,
yet another example where swap was completely useless and just prolonged a weird system state,
instead of quickly out-of-memory killing the offending process.

I'll re-execute fedora-review within a larger VM, tomorrow.

(In reply to Georg Sauthoff from comment #2)
> A few comments:
> 
> > # disable bindings for now as python does not have
> > # have metadata and some perl tests fail
> 
> Duplicated word 'have'.

Thanks. Updated.

> 
> > BuildRequires:  mimalloc-devel
> 
> Is this really required?
> The README states:
> 
> > - libmimalloc: faster memory allocation, but usually not worth the hassle.
> 

Can leave it out.

> > BuildRequires:  libasan
> > BuildRequires:  libubsan
> 
> Are they used in the test suite?

Removed.

> 
> > rm jsmn/jsmn.h
> > ln -s /usr/include/jsmn/jsmn.h jsmn/jsmn.h
> 
> The symlink is superfluous, because the compiler will consult probe
> /usr/include and find there jsmn/jsmn.h as well.
> 

This is needed. It is not automatically picked up
 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=145214409

> > # Json reader tests give errors
> > Patch:          json-test.patch
> 
> It seems the patch thus disables JSON and a few other tests.
> In that case a comment to that extend would be useful.
> 

Done.

> > # Downloaded from Ubuntu Keyserver
> > # https://keyserver.ubuntu.com/pks/lookup?search=2895A881D34270FABFE8F747B4F63339E65D6414&fingerprint=on&op=index
> > Source2:        2895a881d34270fabfe8f747b4f63339e65d6414.asc
> 
> The official keyring of the gnu project is: 
> https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-keyring.gpg
> 
> Hence perhaps it makes sense to reference that.

Done.

> 
> > %{_infodir}/LibreDWG.info*
> 
> The manual appears to be licensed under the GFDL. Does the .spec license tag
> cares about documentation licenses?
> 

Added.

> 
> Apparently, the compile/check is a bit memory hungry, i.e. it killed my VM,
> yet another example where swap was completely useless and just prolonged a
> weird system state,
> instead of quickly out-of-memory killing the offending process.
> 
> I'll re-execute fedora-review within a larger VM, tomorrow.

Thanks.


spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/libredwg.spec
srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/libredwg-0.13.3-1.fc43.src.rpm

Yes, you are right, since the project includes jsmn.h unconventionally (`#include "../jsmn/jsmn.h"`), it's indeed needed.
I missed to double-check that before sending my comment.

---

The fedora-report output (I mark manual-check items I checked manually with '[P]'):

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

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


Issues:
=======
- Dist tag is present.


===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[P]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

Generic:
[P]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[P]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "FSF All Permissive License", "GNU
     General Public License v3.0 or later", "*No copyright* GNU General
     Public License, Version 3", "FSF Unlimited License (with License
     Retention) [generated file]", "FSF Unlimited License [generated
     file]", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later [generated file]",
     "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "X11 License [generated
     file]", "GNU Free Documentation License v1.3 or later", "MIT License",
     "*No copyright* MIT License", "GNU General Public License", "FSF
     Unlimited License (with License Retention)", "FSF Unlimited License
     (with License Retention) and/or GNU General Public License, Version
     2". 942 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/juser/libredwg/libredwg/licensecheck.txt
[P]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[P]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[P]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[P]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries
     with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible.
[P-]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[P]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[P-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[P]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[P]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[P]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[P]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[P]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[P]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[P-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[P]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[P]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[P-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[P]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[P]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[P]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 968727 bytes in 5 files.
[P]: 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: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[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]: 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:
[P-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[P]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[P]: Package functions as described.
[P!]: Latest version is packaged.
[P]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[P]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[P]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[P!]: %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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
     Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1187840 bytes in /usr/share
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libredwg-0.13.3-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm
          libredwg-devel-0.13.3-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm
          libredwg-0.13.3-1.fc45.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpw3hpqsax')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('dxf', '%description -l en_US dxf -> def')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('json', '%description -l en_US json -> son, j son, soon')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('rewriter', '%description -l en_US rewriter -> rewrite, rewrites, re writer')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('saveas', "%description -l en_US saveas -> saves, savers, save's")
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('dwggrep', '%description -l en_US dwggrep -> grepped')
libredwg.src: E: spelling-error ('dwglayer', '%description -l en_US dwglayer -> waylayer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dxf', '%description -l en_US dxf -> def')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('json', '%description -l en_US json -> son, j son, soon')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rewriter', '%description -l en_US rewriter -> rewrite, rewrites, re writer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('saveas', "%description -l en_US saveas -> saves, savers, save's")
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dwglayer', '%description -l en_US dwglayer -> waylayer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/libredwg/load_dwg.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 12 errors, 0 warnings, 62 filtered, 12 badness; has taken 1.2 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: libredwg-debuginfo-0.13.3-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp9j4juu0f')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 33 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 1.6 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.9.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
   /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 3

libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dxf', '%description -l en_US dxf -> def')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('json', '%description -l en_US json -> son, j son, soon')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rewriter', '%description -l en_US rewriter -> rewrite, rewrites, re writer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('saveas', '%description -l en_US saveas -> saves, savers, save as')
libredwg.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('dwglayer', '%description -l en_US dwglayer -> delayer')
libredwg.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/libredwg/load_dwg.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 0 warnings, 103 filtered, 6 badness; has taken 1.8 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/libredwg/libredwg-0.13.3.tar.xz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 83f1f6e78a744777a481ff4520e4cef3f8ac4b2c1c25671077ca12fe81e8816e
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 83f1f6e78a744777a481ff4520e4cef3f8ac4b2c1c25671077ca12fe81e8816e
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/libredwg/libredwg-0.13.3.tar.xz.sig :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 64f6a5a30f47c830399a6ab860d2b59d9b322bbb5aec794710864ea290ddac09
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 64f6a5a30f47c830399a6ab860d2b59d9b322bbb5aec794710864ea290ddac09
https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/gnu-keyring.gpg :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 879648d71da7b3adf9f7d06c30a052393d0dec1e17d3cc335c827412504feefa
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 879648d71da7b3adf9f7d06c30a052393d0dec1e17d3cc335c827412504feefa


Requires
--------
libredwg (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/sh
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libpcre2-16.so.0()(64bit)
    libpcre2-16.so.0(PCRE2_10.47)(64bit)
    libpcre2-8.so.0()(64bit)
    libpcre2-8.so.0(PCRE2_10.47)(64bit)
    libps.so.0()(64bit)
    libredwg.so.0()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libredwg-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    libredwg(x86-64)
    libredwg.so.0()(64bit)



Provides
--------
libredwg:
    libredwg
    libredwg(x86-64)
    libredwg.so.0()(64bit)

libredwg-devel:
    libredwg-devel
    libredwg-devel(x86-64)
    pkgconfig(libredwg)



Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -r -n libredwg-0.13.3-1.fc43.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: Perl, R, PHP, fonts, Python, Java, SugarActivity, Haskell, Ocaml
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH


---


Most relevant points:

[P!]: Latest version is packaged.
[P!]: %check is present and all tests pass.


I reviewed 0.13.3, however 0.13.4. was released on March. 18th.
However, judging from the release notes, the changes shouldn't affect packaging in a significant way.

Some tests are disabled, which is fair, given the project's development status.
I trust the maintainer to revisit the test set when integrating follow-up upstream releases.


I thus approve this request.

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libredwg
Monitoring:
Anitya project is accessible by this link 
`https://release-monitoring.org/project/372290`
 you can modify it manually.
Package wasn't created in Anitya, reason: `Bad Request, some necessary arguments were not provided.`.

Benson, is there a reason why you assigned this issue again to me?