Spec URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/Mate/SPECS/mozo.spec SRPM URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/Mate/SRPM/mozo-1.7.0-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: MATE Desktop menu editor Fedora Account System Username: raveit65
This is a re-review request for a package rename. Old packackage name is mate-menu-editor. Note, this affect only rawhide, f19/20 will use mate-image-viewer-1.6.x until there EOL's.
25? shouldn't it be 21? %if 0%{?fedora} && 0%{?fedora} <= 25 drop the gz and replace with * %{_mandir}/man1/mozo.1.gz
all done Spec URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/Mate/SPECS/mozo.spec SRPM URL: http://raveit65.fedorapeople.org/Mate/SRPM/mozo-1.7.0-2.fc21.src.rpm
Approved Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v2 or later)". Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/leigh/Desktop/1064486-mozo/licensecheck.txt [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256, /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32 [ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python2.7/site- packages/Mozo(mate-menu-editor), /usr/share/mozo(mate-menu-editor) [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format. [ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package [ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [ ]: The spec file handles locales properly. [ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [ ]: Package does not generate any conflict. [ ]: 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. [ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [ ]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in mozo [ ]: 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 40960 bytes in 3 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. Note: No rpmlint messages. [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 %doc. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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 contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [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: [ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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. [ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Package functions as described. [ ]: Latest version is packaged. [ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: mozo-1.7.0-2.fc21.noarch.rpm mozo-1.7.0-2.fc21.src.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint mozo 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- mozo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/python2.7 mate-menus python(abi) Provides -------- mozo: application() application(mozo.desktop) mate-menu-editor mozo Source checksums ---------------- http://pub.mate-desktop.org/releases/1.7/mozo-1.7.0.tar.xz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0cf38a53f81c6b68210719cda9fa0ebe77691f3267be404e7a09ef8a8873fa14 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0cf38a53f81c6b68210719cda9fa0ebe77691f3267be404e7a09ef8a8873fa14
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: mozo Short Description: MATE Desktop menu editor Owners: raveit65 vicodan Branches: InitialCC: Note: branch is empty because other branches than rawhide will use old package name until releases are EOL.
Git done (by process-git-requests).
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: mozo New Branches: f20 Owners: raveit65 vicodan InitialCC: