Some notes:

- Licensing

Well, this package is a bit hard because the source
tarball contains 8119 files, with 3 of them are .tar.gz
which contains another 49 files.

From the point of view with regard to licensing check
my first "grep"ing classified 6115 files, I had to check
the rest ~2000 files with my eyes. While I may have overlooked
something, one thing I detected:

* APSL 1.1 
  - not sure for 1.1, however APSL 2.0 is marked as
    incompatible with GPL 
testcases/kernel/fs/fsx-linux/fsx-linux.c

- Debuginfo issue
I think using
%undefine _missing_build_ids_terminate_build
is better than removing executable permission from
.obj files (not linked, missing build-id).

Full review follows. By the way, I would appreciate it
if you would review my review request (bug 1171991)

Well,

* Documentation
  - At least please add COPYING as %license
  - Also, please consider to add some files to %doc, such
    as README.

* Licensing issue
  - See above

* Debuginfo issue
  - See above

* rpmlint
  - Well, while I ignore "missing-call-to-setgroups-before-setuid"
    rpmlint issue (because these files are for testing such
    syscalls), now:

  * Lots of "non-standard-executable-perm 0775L" rpmlints
    - It should be okay with 0755 (as owner/group is root:root)

  * Some "script-without-shebang" rpmlints
    - As these does not have shebang (and at least some of files
      look like just a text file), these need not have executable
      permission
      (or is this intentional?)

  * Some "spurious-executable-perm" error on testcases/bin/*.c
    - While I am not sure if these *.c files are really needed
      (in the binary rpm), at least executable permissions should
      not be necessary.
      (note that also "devel-file-in-non-devel-package" rpmlint
      appears)

Would you update the status?

Thanks for your comments, and apologies for the delay. Here's a new version that incorporates many of the changes you've mentioned.

* Wed Jan 07 2015 Ken Dreyer <ktdreyer> - 20150119-1
- Update to latest upstream version
- Drop upstreamed patches, and add more for format-string bugs
- Use _missing_build_ids_terminate_build macro (RHBZ #1172414)
- Include COPYING and README (RHBZ #1172414)
- Fix group-writable permissions for rpmlint (RHBZ #1172414)

Exact changes in Git: https://fedorapeople.org/cgit/ktdreyer/public_git/ltp.git/commit/?id=fefba6a3b1efd01e5c1a43447f8607367188d940

Spec URL: https://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ltp.spec
SRPM URL: https://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ltp-20150119-1.fc22.src.rpm

I'm still working on all the rpmlint changes - those are taking me some time to fix.

Okay, now only rpmlint issue is left.

For now I can ignore
- missing-call-to-setgroups-before-setuid
- unstripped-binary-or-object (for .obj - perhaps this cannot be avoided)
- incorrect-fsf-address
- no-manual-page-for-binary
- spelling-error
- manual-page-warning
- missing-call-to-chdir-with-chroot
- uncompressed-zip

So
  - I cannot figure out if the files listed as "devel-file-in-non-devel-package"
    is really needed.
  - And lots of permission issue (script-without-shebang)
    Some idea of mine
    - find out files with executable permission 
      (find %{buildroot} -type f -perm /1000)
    - If it is binary, for now ignore
    - If it is text, check if the text has shebang or not
    - If not having shebang, then drop executable permission

pbrobinson's scratch build of linux-user-chroot?#b7afe5173cbd31b029b027b6f8a14baa5e6ce87a for epel7-archbootstrap and git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/linux-user-chroot?#b7afe5173cbd31b029b027b6f8a14baa5e6ce87a failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12089939

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems
that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please
respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the
submitter to proceed with the review.

If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the
fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take
this ticket.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.

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.