Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-orb/gap-pkg-orb.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-orb/gap-pkg-orb-4.7.3-1.fc24.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: This package enables enumerating orbits in various ways from within GAP.
Package looks good -- APPROVED Note: upstream mentions a dependency on GAPDoc which you don't have, but I suppose that's just for building documentation? Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [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: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/michel/sources/fedora/reviews/1246673-gap-pkg- orb/licensecheck.txt => ltmain is just libtool, false positive [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [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 [-]: 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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 2 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]: 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: [-]: 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). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: 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. [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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: gap-pkg-orb-4.7.3-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm gap-pkg-orb-4.7.3-1.fc22.src.rpm gap-pkg-orb.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-orb/GPL gap-pkg-orb.src: W: invalid-url Source0: https://github.com/gap-system/orb/releases/download/v4.7.3/orb-4.7.3.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 403: Forbidden 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: gap-pkg-orb-debuginfo-4.7.3-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- gap-pkg-orb.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/gap-pkg-orb/GPL 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/michel/sources/fedora/reviews/1246673-gap-pkg-orb/srpm/gap-pkg-orb.spec 2015-07-25 10:56:01.349548715 +0700 +++ /home/michel/sources/fedora/reviews/1246673-gap-pkg-orb/srpm-unpacked/gap-pkg-orb.spec 2015-07-24 23:32:07.000000000 +0700 @@ -38,5 +38,5 @@ %check -# Skip the speed test; we want to test for correctness only +# Skip the speed test; this is for correctness only # Skip m22f2d34p231.g and m22f2d34p443520.g; they try to access the Internet # via AtlasRep. Requires -------- gap-pkg-orb (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/update-gap-workspace gap-core(x86-64) gap-pkg-io libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- gap-pkg-orb: gap-pkg-orb gap-pkg-orb(x86-64) Unversioned so-files -------------------- gap-pkg-orb: /usr/lib/gap/pkg/orb/bin/x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu-gcc-default64/orb.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/gap-system/orb/releases/download/v4.7.3/orb-4.7.3.tar.bz2 : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e9800e1638739c82f4030eaa0df078963e9716dea78675771ba25a4b262c2a32 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e9800e1638739c82f4030eaa0df078963e9716dea78675771ba25a4b262c2a32 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1246673 Buildroot used: fedora-22-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 Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #1) > Note: upstream mentions a dependency on GAPDoc which you don't have, but I > suppose that's just for building documentation? GAPDoc and gap-core have an incestuous relationship; neither works without the other, so they are mutually dependent. Since all the higher level packages, like this one, require gap-core to work, they all pull in GAPDoc, too. Thank you very much for the review!
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: gap-pkg-orb Short Description: Methods to enumerate orbits in GAP Upstream URL: http://gap-system.github.io/orb/ Owners: jjames Branches: f22 f23 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
gap-pkg-orb-4.7.3-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gap-pkg-orb-4.7.3-1.fc22
gap-pkg-orb-4.7.3-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository.
gap-pkg-orb-4.7.3-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.