Bug 2430610
| Summary: | Review: Dog_Machine | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | carysayer |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody> |
| Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 43 | CC: | code, package-review |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | --- | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2026-04-16 00:45:25 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: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 201449 | ||
|
Description
carysayer
2026-01-17 18:47:54 UTC
This looks pretty dubious. The upstream appears to be a one-time upload to the Internet Archive, https://archive.org/download/dog_machine / https://archive.org/details/dog_machine. The upload to the IA claims it’s public-domain (“Public Domain Mark 1.0”), but the spec file lists the license as GPL-3.0-or-later. I have not looked inside the source RPM at all, but I took a look at the spec file, and it is obviously just copying a pre-compiled executable in place. Everything in Fedora needs to be built from source[1]. There are other issues, like hard-coded /usr/lib instead of %{_libdir}[2], no effort to support primary architectures other than x86_64[3], odd installation of a C++ source file, missing debuginfo[4] (because the binary is not built from source), no source URL[5] without a good justification, and use of the Group tag[6]. It looks like this software was only published once, to the Internet Archive, and only with the express intent of including it in Fedora? Even if the intentions are good and genuine, that *looks* a little weird and even a bit suspicious, especially considering the submission contains a pre-compiled executable. [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-packaged/#prebuilt-binaries-or-libraries [2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_macros [3] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_architecture_support [4] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Debuginfo/#_missing_debuginfo_packages [5] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ [6] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_tags_and_sections The ticket summary is not in the correct format.
Expected:
Review Request: <main package name here> - <short summary here>
Found:
Review: Dog_Machine
As a consequence, the package name cannot be parsed and submitted to
be automatically build. Please modify the ticket summary and trigger a
build by typing [fedora-review-service-build].
---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
The issues noted in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430610#c1 need to be addressed. Are you still working on this? This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it. |