Spec URL: http://mathstuf.fedorapeople.org//khard.spec SRPM URL: http://mathstuf.fedorapeople.org//khard-0.2.1-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Khard is an address book for the Linux console. It creates, reads, modifies and removes carddav address book entries at your local machine.
This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9126162
Hi Ben! There are some issues: [ ] Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [ ] There is no version in your changelog [ ] Please append #/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz to your Source0 to get a propper named source. [ ] Some points from rpmlint: khard.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/khard/twinkle-plugin/scripts/incoming_call_failed.py /usr/bin/env khard.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/khard/twinkle-plugin/scripts/incoming_call_ended.py /usr/bin/env khard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/davcontroller/davcontroller.py 0644L /usr/bin/python khard.src: W: strange-permission v0.2.1.tar.gz 0640L khard.src: W: strange-permission khard.spec 0640L Cheers, Florian
Thanks. (In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #2) > [ ] Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel Fixed. > [ ] There is no version in your changelog Fixed. > [ ] Please append > #/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz > to your Source0 to get a propper named source. I see no reason why this is necessary. %setup -n handles this just fine. > [ ] Some points from rpmlint: > khard.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency > /usr/share/doc/khard/twinkle-plugin/scripts/incoming_call_failed.py > /usr/bin/env > khard.noarch: W: doc-file-dependency > /usr/share/doc/khard/twinkle-plugin/scripts/incoming_call_ended.py > /usr/bin/env I'll just leave these out; twinkle isn't in Fedora anyways. > khard.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/davcontroller/davcontroller.py 0644L > /usr/bin/python Patched locally and filed upstream: <https://github.com/scheibler/khard/issues/8>. > khard.src: W: strange-permission v0.2.1.tar.gz 0640L > khard.src: W: strange-permission khard.spec 0640L My umask; no effect when built from infrastructure. Spec URL: http://mathstuf.fedorapeople.org//khard.spec SRPM URL: http://mathstuf.fedorapeople.org//khard-0.2.1-2.fc23.src.rpm
Hi Ben! > > [ ] Please append > > #/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz > > to your Source0 to get a propper named source. > > I see no reason why this is necessary. %setup -n handles this just fine. rpm will then use %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz as the tarball name. If you use spectool -g khard.spec to download the tarball, it will rename the tarball for you. At the moment, you get v0.2.1.tar.gz which can be everything. It just makes it easier to handle multiple packages and is not a blocker. > > khard.noarch: E: non-executable-script > > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/davcontroller/davcontroller.py 0644L > > /usr/bin/python > > Patched locally and filed upstream: > <https://github.com/scheibler/khard/issues/8>. Your patch doesn't work well. Please take a look at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_tricks#Remove_shebang_from_Python_libraries Cheers, Florian
Updated to the latest and fixed the executable permission errors. Also fixed a problem requiring argparse with 2.7. Spec URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/khard/khard.spec SRPM URL: http://benboeckel.net/packaging/khard/khard-0.4.1-1.fc24.src.rpm
Ping?
Hi Ben! If you package the latest commit (8a206ce3ad129d1588f8f57bd65d860369e92036), you don't need to patch the sources. And I still like the use of git tags instead of guessing what kind of software is in v0.4.1.tar.gz - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Git_Tags Cheers, Florian
(In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #7) > If you package the latest commit (8a206ce3ad129d1588f8f57bd65d860369e92036), > you don't need to patch the sources. Eh, a patch is easier to manage than all the git commit release stuff, IMO. > And I still like the use of git tags instead of guessing what kind of > software is in v0.4.1.tar.gz - *shrug* It is in its own directory here; I'm not too worried about it.
Hi Ben! From rpmlint: khard.src: W: strange-permission v0.4.1.tar.gz 640 khard.src: W: strange-permission 0001-setup.py-don-t-require-argparse-in-2.6-and-up.patch 640 khard.src: W: strange-permission khard.spec 640 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#strange-permission Everything else looks fine so far. Cheers, Florian
Those are due to my umask (027). They do not occur when building from the infrastructure.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: 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. [-]: 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]: 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 20480 bytes in 4 files. [x]: 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]: 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]: 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]: Dist tag is present. [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 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 Python: [x]: 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. [x]: 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. [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. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. ---> https://github.com/scheibler/khard/pull/18 [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. ---> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10654725 [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: 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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: khard-0.4.1-1.fc24.noarch.rpm khard-0.4.1-1.fc24.src.rpm khard.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US carddav -> cardboard khard.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary davcontroller khard.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary khard khard.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US carddav -> cardboard khard.src: W: strange-permission v0.4.1.tar.gz 640 khard.src: W: strange-permission 0001-setup.py-don-t-require-argparse-in-2.6-and-up.patch 640 khard.src: W: strange-permission khard.spec 640 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- khard.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary khard khard.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary davcontroller 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Requires -------- khard (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python python(abi) python-argparse python-configobj python-vobject Provides -------- khard: khard Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/scheibler/khard/archive/v0.4.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 31bf52d1dbdf6ad43aa3166a22f3a6f4909f4731b690f12e87211c4fbf5cd127 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 31bf52d1dbdf6ad43aa3166a22f3a6f4909f4731b690f12e87211c4fbf5cd127 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.3 (bcf15e3) last change: 2015-05-04 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1197947 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
Thanks! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: khard Short Description: An address book for the Linux console Upstream URL: https://github.com/scheibler/khard Owners: mathstuf Branches: f22 f23 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
khard-0.4.1-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 23. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/khard-0.4.1-1.fc23
khard-0.4.1-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/khard-0.4.1-1.fc22
Package khard-0.4.1-1.fc23: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing khard-0.4.1-1.fc23' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-13343/khard-0.4.1-1.fc23 then log in and leave karma (feedback).
khard-0.4.1-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
khard-0.4.1-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.