Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/f24-kde-theme/f24-kde-theme.spec SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/f24-kde-theme/f24-kde-theme-24.0-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Fedora Twenty Four KDE Theme Fedora Account System Username: rdieter
Some general advice in prior: - You must use %license COPYING.CC-BY-SA COPYING.GPLv2 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text - Why no Obsoletes? I see a lot of Provides. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages
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 - 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 COPYING.CC-BY-SA 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. ===== 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/builder/fedora-review/1321656-f24-kde-theme/licensecheck.txt => Must use %license. [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. => See below. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/plasma/look-and- feel, /usr/share/plasma, /usr/share/plasma/desktoptheme, /usr/share/kservices5 [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. => See below. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. => Please fix folders ownership, see above. [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 51200 bytes in 3 files. [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines => Please fix license issue. [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]: 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [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. [!]: 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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [!]: 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) Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.15 starting (python version = 3.4.3)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled 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 Mock Version: 1.2.15 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.15 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/builder/fedora-review/1321656-f24-kde-theme/results/f24-kde-theme-24.0-1.fc25.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 25 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/builder/fedora-review/1321656-f24-kde-theme/results/f24-kde-theme-24.0-1.fc25.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts WARNING: unable to delete selinux filesystems (/tmp/mock-selinux-plugin.qpnx08yg): [Errno 1] Operation not permitted: '/tmp/mock-selinux-plugin.qpnx08yg' Rpmlint ------- Checking: f24-kde-theme-24.0-1.fc25.noarch.rpm f24-kde-theme-24.0-1.fc25.src.rpm f24-kde-theme.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/kservices5/plasma-lookandfeel-org.fedoraproject.fedora.twenty.four.desktop /usr/share/plasma/look-and-feel/org.fedoraproject.fedora.twenty.four/metadata.desktop f24-kde-theme.src:3: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 2) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/builder/fedora-review/1321656-f24-kde-theme/srpm/f24-kde-theme.spec 2016-03-29 19:05:50.173453692 +0200 +++ /home/builder/fedora-review/1321656-f24-kde-theme/srpm-unpacked/f24-kde-theme.spec 2016-03-28 21:15:01.000000000 +0200 @@ -3,5 +3,5 @@ Summary: Fedora Twenty Four KDE Theme Version: 24.0 -Release: 2%{?dist} +Release: 1%{?dist} License: GPLv2+ and CC-BY-SA @@ -59,6 +59,5 @@ %files -%doc README -%license COPYING.CC-BY-SA COPYING.GPLv2 +%doc README COPYING.CC-BY-SA COPYING.GPLv2 %{_datadir}/plasma/desktoptheme/F24/ %{_datadir}/plasma/look-and-feel/org.fedoraproject.fedora.twenty.four/ @@ -66,7 +65,4 @@ %changelog -* Mon Mar 28 2016 Rex Dieter <rdieter> - 24.0-2 -- use %%license - * Mon Mar 28 2016 Rex Dieter <rdieter> 24.0-1 - f24-kde-theme Requires -------- f24-kde-theme (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): f24-backgrounds-kde f24-kde-theme-core Provides -------- f24-kde-theme: f24-kde-theme f24-plasma-desktoptheme f24-plasma-theme system-kde-theme system-ksplash-theme system-plasma-theme systesm-plasma-desktoptheme Source checksums ---------------- https://fedorahosted.org/releases/f/e/fedora-kde-artwork/f24-kde-theme-24.0.tar.bz2 : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 74600c77454157a8c8c27c59e08a2451cac07eb46dde630723766ffc15e778da CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 74600c77454157a8c8c27c59e08a2451cac07eb46dde630723766ffc15e778da Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1321656 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
Looks like I forgot to post updated links for %license change: Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/f24-kde-theme/f24-kde-theme.spec SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/f24-kde-theme/f24-kde-theme-24.0-2.fc24.src.rpm were there any other blockers? (my initial perusal sees none)
Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/f24-kde-theme/f24-kde-theme.spec SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/f24-kde-theme/f24-kde-theme-24.0-3.fc24.src.rpm %changelog * Tue Mar 29 2016 Rex Dieter <rdieter> - 24.0-3 - fix (parent) dir ownership * Mon Mar 28 2016 Rex Dieter <rdieter> - 24.0-2 - use %%license
LGTM, APPROVED [?]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/plasma/look-and- feel(f23-kde-theme, plasma-workspace), /usr/share/plasma(f23-kde- theme, kf5-plasma), /usr/share/plasma/desktoptheme(f23-kde-theme, plasma-desktop, kf5-plasma), /usr/share/kservices5(kf5-filesystem) => is that okay?
imported, thanks
f24-kde-theme-24.0-3.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f7abb7f371
f24-kde-theme-24.0-3.fc24 kde-settings-24-5.fc24 plasma-workspace-5.5.5-9.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f7abb7f371
f24-kde-theme-24.0-3.fc24 kde-settings-24-5.fc24 plasma-workspace-5.5.5-10.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f7abb7f371
f24-kde-theme-24.0-3.fc24, kde-settings-24-5.fc24, plasma-workspace-5.5.5-10.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f7abb7f371
f24-kde-theme-24.0-3.fc24, kde-settings-24-5.fc24, plasma-workspace-5.5.5-10.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.