Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tpokorra/lbs-mono-fedora/master/nunit/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://download.solidcharity.com/repos/tpokorra/mono-fedora/fedora/21/src/nunit-2.6.3-4.fc21.src.rpm Description: NUnit is a Unit-testing Framework for .Net/Mono. This would replace mono-nunit package resulting out of mono.srpm. The NUnit provided by the mono tarball is too old (2.4), we need at least 2.6.3 for a couple of packages to build (MonoDevelop, NAnt, etc) Fedora Account System Username: tpokorra
I have fixed the spec so that rpmlint does not show any errors or warnings anymore: Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tpokorra/lbs-mono-fedora/master/nunit/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://download.solidcharity.com/repos/tpokorra/mono-fedora/fedora/21/src/nunit-2.6.3-5.fc21.src.rpm Description: NUnit is a Unit-testing Framework for .Net/Mono. This would replace mono-nunit package resulting out of mono.srpm. The NUnit provided by the mono tarball is too old (2.4), we need at least 2.6.3 for a couple of packages to build (MonoDevelop, NAnt, etc) Fedora Account System Username: tpokorra
Some suggestion - Remove defatt, is no used any more %defattr(-,root,root) - devel package must require %{?_isa} Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} Source have a license.txt, this should be included with %licesen You should use mono macros %{_monogacdir} instead %{_libdir}/mono/gac %{_monodir} instead %{_libdir}/mono see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Mono#File_Locations Script name is beter not use . and - only the number `basename -s .sh %{SOURCE2}`26 instead `basename -s .sh %{SOURCE2}`-2.6
Thank you! I have applied your suggestions: Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tpokorra/lbs-mono-fedora/master/nunit/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://download.solidcharity.com/repos/tpokorra/mono-fedora/fedora/21/src/nunit-2.6.3-5.fc21.src.rpm
hmm, now rpmlint complains again: nunit.src:72: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{buildroot}/usr/lib but somehow it will install into lib64 when I use %{_libdir}, but %{_monogacdir} goes for lib only any suggestions?
Created attachment 1034785 [details] initial generated review I still need to look into several issues that have been reported, eg. "Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages."
updated the spec and the srpm: Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tpokorra/lbs-mono-fedora/master/nunit/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit-2.6.4-1.fc21.src.rpm Satisfied: * Latest version is packaged (upgraded to 2.6.4) * added documentation: nunit-docs Not sure what to do about: nunit.x86_64: E: no-binary I tried to use noarch, but then read https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Mono?rd=Packaging/Mono that says, we do not package mono packages as noarch.
Created attachment 1041774 [details] another generated review
===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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". 1045 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /media/galileo/fedora/1222926-nunit/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit- console-runner(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.framework (mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.util(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.mocks(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core.interfaces(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core(mono-nunit, nunit) [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [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. [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. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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 ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in nunit- docs , nunit-devel [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: 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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 3082240 bytes in /usr/share [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: nunit-2.6.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm nunit-docs-2.6.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm nunit-devel-2.6.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm nunit-2.6.4-1.fc23.src.rpm nunit.x86_64: E: no-binary nunit.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-gui26 nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-console26 nunit-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- nunit.x86_64: E: no-binary nunit.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-gui26 nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-console26 nunit-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. Requires -------- nunit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh mono(System) mono(System.Configuration) mono(System.Drawing) mono(System.Runtime.Remoting) mono(System.Windows.Forms) mono(System.Xml) mono(mscorlib) mono(nunit-console-runner) mono(nunit-gui-runner) mono(nunit.core) mono(nunit.core.interfaces) mono(nunit.framework) mono(nunit.uiexception) mono(nunit.uikit) mono(nunit.util) nunit-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config nunit pkgconfig nunit-docs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nunit Provides -------- nunit: mono(nunit) mono(nunit-console) mono(nunit-console-runner) mono(nunit-gui-runner) mono(nunit.core) mono(nunit.core.interfaces) mono(nunit.framework) mono(nunit.mocks) mono(nunit.uiexception) mono(nunit.uikit) mono(nunit.util) nunit nunit(x86-64) nunit-devel: nunit-devel nunit-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(nunit) nunit-docs: nunit-docs nunit-docs(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/nunit/nunitv2/archive/2.6.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d5d3ed8d4f811b33f07ede67025dbcf1c4949e076130489a292002bee73e68b1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d5d3ed8d4f811b33f07ede67025dbcf1c4949e076130489a292002bee73e68b1 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1222926 --mock-config fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
(In reply to Claudio Rodrigo Pereyra DIaz from comment #8) > ===== MUST items ===== > > C/C++: > [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. > [x]: Package contains no static executables. > [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) > [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. > > 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". 1045 files have unknown license. > Detailed output of licensecheck in > /media/galileo/fedora/1222926-nunit/licensecheck.txt > [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. > [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. > Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit- > console-runner(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.framework > (mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.util(mono-nunit, nunit), > /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.mocks(mono-nunit, nunit), > /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core.interfaces(mono-nunit, nunit), > /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core(mono-nunit, nunit) > [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. > [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. nunit-gui need a desktop file > [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. > [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. > [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. > [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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. > [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > [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 > > ===== SHOULD items ===== > > Generic: > [x]: 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). > [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in nunit- > docs , nunit-devel Need add %{?_isa} to devel package. > [x]: Package functions as described. > [x]: Latest version is packaged. > [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. > [x]: 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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. > [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. > [x]: SourceX is a working URL. > [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. > > ===== EXTRA items ===== > > Generic: > [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package > is arched. > Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 3082240 bytes in /usr/share > [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: nunit-2.6.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm > nunit-docs-2.6.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm > nunit-devel-2.6.4-1.fc23.x86_64.rpm > nunit-2.6.4-1.fc23.src.rpm > nunit.x86_64: E: no-binary > nunit.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib > nunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation > nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-gui26 > nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-console26 > nunit-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib > nunit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation > 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. > > > > > Rpmlint (installed packages) > ---------------------------- > nunit.x86_64: E: no-binary > nunit.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib > nunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation > nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-gui26 > nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-console26 > nunit-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib > nunit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. > > > > Requires > -------- > nunit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /bin/sh > mono(System) > mono(System.Configuration) > mono(System.Drawing) > mono(System.Runtime.Remoting) > mono(System.Windows.Forms) > mono(System.Xml) > mono(mscorlib) > mono(nunit-console-runner) > mono(nunit-gui-runner) > mono(nunit.core) > mono(nunit.core.interfaces) > mono(nunit.framework) > mono(nunit.uiexception) > mono(nunit.uikit) > mono(nunit.util) > > nunit-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /usr/bin/pkg-config > nunit > pkgconfig > > nunit-docs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > nunit > > > > Provides > -------- > nunit: > mono(nunit) > mono(nunit-console) > mono(nunit-console-runner) > mono(nunit-gui-runner) > mono(nunit.core) > mono(nunit.core.interfaces) > mono(nunit.framework) > mono(nunit.mocks) > mono(nunit.uiexception) > mono(nunit.uikit) > mono(nunit.util) > nunit > nunit(x86-64) > > nunit-devel: > nunit-devel > nunit-devel(x86-64) > pkgconfig(nunit) > > nunit-docs: > nunit-docs > nunit-docs(x86-64) > > > > Source checksums > ---------------- > https://github.com/nunit/nunitv2/archive/2.6.4.tar.gz : > CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : > d5d3ed8d4f811b33f07ede67025dbcf1c4949e076130489a292002bee73e68b1 > CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : > d5d3ed8d4f811b33f07ede67025dbcf1c4949e076130489a292002bee73e68b1 > > > Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 > Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1222926 --mock-config > fedora-rawhide-x86_64 > Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 > Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ > Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, > R, PHP, Ruby > Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
updated the spec and the srpm: Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit-2.6.4-3.fc23.src.rpm This now contains a nunit.desktop file, and also installs the icon in the right place. I have also fixed the requires for the devel package
I just realized that I introduced new issues: Issues: ======= - gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in nunit See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache - 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. Note: License file license.html is marked as %doc instead of %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text - Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 3072000 bytes in 151 files. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation - update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in nunit See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop- database I will fix these now...
updated the spec and the srpm: Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit-2.6.4-4.fc23.src.rpm
fixing another typo: updated the spec and the srpm: Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit-2.6.4-5.fc23.src.rpm
You need add desktop-file-utils as Requiered main packages. Without this mock builds fail.
Thanks! I have fixed it. It builds now as a scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10356051 updated spec and the srpm: Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit-2.6.4-6.fc23.src.rpm
Only need fix this to be ok for me. [ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/icons/NUnit [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/NUnit
I have fixed that now. updated spec and the srpm: Spec URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit.spec SRPM URL: https://tpokorra.fedorapeople.org/mono/nunit-2.6.4-7.fc23.src.rpm
Now it is OK to me. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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". 1045 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /media/galileo/fedora/1222926-nunit/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [-]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit- console-runner(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.framework (mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.util(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.mocks(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core.interfaces(mono-nunit, nunit), /usr/lib/mono/gac/nunit.core(mono-nunit, nunit) [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [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]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in nunit [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in nunit [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: 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. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in nunit- doc [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: 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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 3082240 bytes in /usr/share [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: nunit-2.6.4-7.fc23.x86_64.rpm nunit-doc-2.6.4-7.fc23.x86_64.rpm nunit-devel-2.6.4-7.fc23.x86_64.rpm nunit-2.6.4-7.fc23.src.rpm nunit.x86_64: E: no-binary nunit.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-gui26 nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-console26 nunit-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation nunit.src: W: strange-permission nunit-gui.sh 0755L 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No existe el fichero o el directorio nunit.x86_64: E: no-binary nunit.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit.x86_64: W: no-documentation nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-gui26 nunit.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nunit-console26 nunit-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nunit-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. Requires -------- nunit (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh mono(System) mono(System.Configuration) mono(System.Drawing) mono(System.Runtime.Remoting) mono(System.Windows.Forms) mono(System.Xml) mono(mscorlib) mono(nunit-console-runner) mono(nunit-gui-runner) mono(nunit.core) mono(nunit.core.interfaces) mono(nunit.framework) mono(nunit.uiexception) mono(nunit.uikit) mono(nunit.util) nunit-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config nunit(x86-64) pkgconfig nunit-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nunit Provides -------- nunit: application() application(nunit.desktop) mimehandler(application/octet-stream) mono(nunit) mono(nunit-console) mono(nunit-console-runner) mono(nunit-gui-runner) mono(nunit.core) mono(nunit.core.interfaces) mono(nunit.framework) mono(nunit.mocks) mono(nunit.uiexception) mono(nunit.uikit) mono(nunit.util) nunit nunit(x86-64) nunit-devel: nunit-devel nunit-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(nunit) nunit-doc: nunit-doc nunit-doc(x86-64) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/nunit/nunitv2/archive/2.6.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d5d3ed8d4f811b33f07ede67025dbcf1c4949e076130489a292002bee73e68b1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d5d3ed8d4f811b33f07ede67025dbcf1c4949e076130489a292002bee73e68b1 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1222926 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: nunit Short Description: Unit-testing framework for .Net/mono Upstream URL: http://nuget.org/ Owners: tpokorra mono-sig Branches: InitialCC:
fixing upstream link... New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: nunit Short Description: Unit-testing framework for .Net/mono Upstream URL: http://nunit.org/ Owners: tpokorra mono-sig Branches: InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).