Bug 2437041

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10096005
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2437041-gpgmepp/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10096005-gpgmepp/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
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.

New copr build for all architectures:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mhlavink/gpgmesplit/build/10110406/

No change to srpm/spec

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

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

* The `%generate_buildrequires` section is redundant.
* The `chrpath` build require seems redundant.
* typo: `-DENALE_SHARED=yes`, you probably meant `-DENABLE...`
* 2 things regarding `gpgme%{?_isa} >= %{version}`:
    * Are you sure that the version of gpgmepp will never be higher than that of gpgme?
    * Is this even necessary for the lib package?  I'd expect the dependency generator
      to add proper requires on the right soname.
* Does the package have any tests to be run in the %check section?

Nit:
 * `%directive -n %{name}-devel` can be shortened to `%directive devel`.
 * IMHO, the legacy provides for `gpgme-pp` and `gpgme-pp-devel` can be dropped now.
   I've checked the git history of gpgme and they were introduced more than 9 years ago.

===== 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 successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[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.
[x]: 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.
[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]: 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.
     Note: Documentation size is 110342 bytes in 4 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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]: 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:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: 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:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: gpgmepp-2.0.0-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm
          gpgmepp-devel-2.0.0-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm
          gpgmepp-2.0.0-1.fc44.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/tmprsbflncx')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
gpgmepp.spec: W: no-%check-section
gpgmepp.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gpgmepp/COPYING
gpgmepp.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gpgmepp/COPYING.LESSER
gpgmepp.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gpgmepp/COPYING.LIB
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/configuration.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/context.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/data.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/decryptionresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/defaultassuantransaction.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/editinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/encryptionresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/engineinfo.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/error.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/eventloopinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/exception.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/global.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgaddexistingsubkeyeditinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgadduserideditinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgagentgetinfoassuantransaction.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpggencardkeyinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgmefw.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgrevokekeyeditinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgsetexpirytimeeditinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgsetownertrusteditinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/gpgsignkeyeditinteractor.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/importresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/interfaces/assuantransaction.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/interfaces/dataprovider.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/interfaces/passphraseprovider.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/interfaces/progressprovider.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/interfaces/statusconsumer.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/key.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/keygenerationresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/keylistresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/notation.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/result.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/scdgetinfoassuantransaction.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/signingresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/statusconsumerassuantransaction.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/swdbresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/tofuinfo.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/verificationresult.h
gpgmepp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/gpgme++/vfsmountresult.h
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 42 errors, 2 warnings, 28 filtered, 42 badness; has taken 0.3 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: gpgmepp-debuginfo-2.0.0-1.fc44.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/tmpqzxy0ch6')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "gpgmepp".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "gpgmepp-debuginfo".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "gpgmepp-devel".
There are no files to process nor additional arguments.
Nothing to do, aborting.
============================ 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

 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://gnupg.org/ftp/gcrypt/gpgmepp/gpgmepp-2.0.0.tar.xz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : d4796049c06708a26f3096f748ef095347e1a3c1e570561701fe952c3f565382
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d4796049c06708a26f3096f748ef095347e1a3c1e570561701fe952c3f565382
https://gnupg.org/ftp/gcrypt/gpgmepp/gpgmepp-2.0.0.tar.xz.sig :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 4ff7b842f33c0905fba6414594b99c35394a0f79a8667ba65bdd89a362ca2446
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 4ff7b842f33c0905fba6414594b99c35394a0f79a8667ba65bdd89a362ca2446
https://gnupg.org/signature_key.asc :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 8eef03be67f3d4f0be96a6356521721388ae6477866ac0a06d3cf63e84c89a7d
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8eef03be67f3d4f0be96a6356521721388ae6477866ac0a06d3cf63e84c89a7d


Requires
--------
gpgmepp (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    gpgme(x86-64)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libgpgme.so.45()(64bit)
    libgpgme.so.45(GPGME_1.0)(64bit)
    libgpgme.so.45(GPGME_1.1)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

gpgmepp-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    cmake-filesystem(x86-64)
    gpgme-devel(x86-64)
    gpgmepp(x86-64)
    libgpgmepp.so.7()(64bit)
    pkgconfig(gpg-error)
    pkgconfig(gpgme)



Provides
--------
gpgmepp:
    gpgme-pp(x86-64)
    gpgmepp
    gpgmepp(x86-64)
    libgpgmepp.so.7()(64bit)

gpgmepp-devel:
    cmake(Gpgmepp)
    cmake(gpgmepp)
    gpgme-pp-devel(x86-64)
    gpgmepp-devel
    gpgmepp-devel(x86-64)
    pkgconfig(gpgmepp)



Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29
Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name gpgmepp --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, Perl, Haskell, Java, SugarActivity, Ocaml, fonts, R, Python
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH