Spec URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/rubygem-fog-libvirt.spec SRPM URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/rubygem-fog-libvirt-0.0.1-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: This library can be used as a module for 'fog' or as standalone libvirt provider. Fedora Account System Username: jstribny
looking
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines ==> waiting on update of rubygem-ruby-libvirt to >= 0.5.0 (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040203) TODO: verify install once that package is done. - gems should require rubygems package Note: Requires: rubygems missing in rubygem-fog-libvirt-doc See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#RubyGems ==> OK: doc requires main package, which requires rubygems - Package contains Requires: ruby(release). ==> Ok. it should not be there according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#RubyGems ===== 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. ==> MIT [X]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. ==> /usr/share/gems/gems/fog-libvirt-0.0.1/LICENSE.md %license %{gem_instdir}/LICENSE.md in specfile [X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. ==> OK: doc pkg requires main package which holds LICENSE file [X]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gems, /usr/share/gems/doc ==> these are owned by the rubygems package [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. [X]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [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 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]: 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 Ruby: [X]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform independent under %{gem_dir}. ==> no platform dependent files included [x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage [x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated. [x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name} [x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel. [x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro. [x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch [x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi). ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages. Note: Package contains font files [-]: 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 rubygem- fog-libvirt-doc [X]: Package functions as described. [X]: Latest version is packaged. [X]: 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. [X]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [X]: %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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Ruby: [X]: Specfile should use macros from rubygem-devel package. Note: The specfile doesn't use these macros: %exclude %{gem_cache}, %{gem_spec} ==> strange. specfile _does_ uses thes macros. [x]: Gem package should exclude cached Gem. [x]: Gem should use %gem_install macro. [x]: Test suite should not be run by rake. [x]: Test suite of the library should be run. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.9 starting (python version = 3.4.2)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux disabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled ccache Mock Version: 1.2.9 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.9 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/obnox/review/fog-libvirt/1229594-rubygem-fog-libvirt/results/rubygem-fog-libvirt-0.0.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm /home/obnox/review/fog-libvirt/1229594-rubygem-fog-libvirt/results/rubygem-fog-libvirt-doc-0.0.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 23 install /home/obnox/review/fog-libvirt/1229594-rubygem-fog-libvirt/results/rubygem-fog-libvirt-0.0.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm /home/obnox/review/fog-libvirt/1229594-rubygem-fog-libvirt/results/rubygem-fog-libvirt-doc-0.0.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm ==> New version is in preparation, see above Rpmlint ------- Checking: rubygem-fog-libvirt-0.0.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm rubygem-fog-libvirt-doc-0.0.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm rubygem-fog-libvirt-0.0.1-1.fc23.src.rpm rubygem-fog-libvirt.noarch: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- rubygem-fog-libvirt (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libvirt ruby(rubygems) rubygem(fog-core) rubygem(fog-json) rubygem(fog-xml) rubygem(json) rubygem(ruby-libvirt) rubygem-fog-libvirt-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): rubygem-fog-libvirt Provides -------- rubygem-fog-libvirt: rubygem(fog-libvirt) rubygem-fog-libvirt rubygem-fog-libvirt-doc: rubygem-fog-libvirt-doc Source checksums ---------------- https://rubygems.org/gems/fog-libvirt-0.0.1.gem : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2ddea4473caa910ea431ca4ee01ac8573a11003a357b6fd27d4c73ed8c8c0e7a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2ddea4473caa910ea431ca4ee01ac8573a11003a357b6fd27d4c73ed8c8c0e7a Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1229594 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Ruby, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
Summary: The package looks good, we only need to verify installation once the update of rubygem-ruby-libvirt to 0.5.2 is done (bug #1040203).
Installs fine with the updated rubygem-ruby-libvirt package (tested with build from koji). The above assessment still stands ==> the package is good to go in.
Thanks Michael. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-fog-libvirt Short Description: Module for the 'fog' gem to support libvirt Upstream URL: http://github.com/fog/fog-libvirt Owners: jstribny Branches: f22 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).