Bugzilla (bugzilla.redhat.com) will be under maintenance for infrastructure upgrades and will not be available on July 31st between 12:30 AM - 05:30 AM UTC. We appreciate your understanding and patience. You can follow status.redhat.com for details.
Bug 1272194 - Review Request: target-isns - An iSNS client for the Linux LIO iSCSI target
Summary: Review Request: target-isns - An iSNS client for the Linux LIO iSCSI target
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Chris Leech
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2015-10-15 17:46 UTC by Andy Grover
Modified: 2015-10-19 17:59 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2015-10-19 17:59:56 UTC
Type: ---
cleech: fedora-review+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Andy Grover 2015-10-15 17:46:19 UTC
Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/target-isns.spec
SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/target-isns-0.5-1.fc22.src.rpm

Target-isns is an Internet Storage Name Service (iSNS) client for the Linux
LIO iSCSI target. It allows registering LIO iSCSI targets with an iSNS server.

Fedora Account System Username: grover

Comment 1 Chris Leech 2015-10-15 18:59:27 UTC
/etc/target-isns.conf isn't marked as a config file

+%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/target-isns.conf
 %doc README.md

Comment 2 Andy Grover 2015-10-16 17:30:14 UTC
Corrected spec and src rpm:

Spec URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/target-isns.spec
SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~grover/new/target-isns-0.5-2.fc22.src.rpm

Comment 3 Chris Leech 2015-10-16 23:34:22 UTC
Package Review

[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated

===== MUST items =====

[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.

[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[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". 24 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/cleech/review/1272194-target-
[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.
[-]: 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
[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.
[x]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[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
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[-]: 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.
[?]: 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
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[?]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
[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
[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 =====

[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

Checking: target-isns-0.5-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm
target-isns.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) iSCSI -> SCSI, i SCSI, Isis
target-isns.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iSCSI -> SCSI, i SCSI, Isis
target-isns.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) iSCSI -> SCSI, i SCSI, Isis
target-isns.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iSCSI -> SCSI, i SCSI, Isis
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.

Rpmlint (debuginfo)
Checking: target-isns-debuginfo-0.5-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

target-isns (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):


Source checksums
https://fedorahosted.org/releases/t/a/target-isns/target-isns-0.5.tar.xz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 5b104eb8b0386713e4a9288b7c3a80c8b370392f476109bd73742489db98b2fe
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5b104eb8b0386713e4a9288b7c3a80c8b370392f476109bd73742489db98b2fe

Generated by fedora-review 0.5.3 (bcf15e3) last change: 2015-05-04
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1272194 -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

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.