Spec URL: http://mulhern.fedorapeople.org/python-pyprocdev/python-pyprocdev.spec SRPM URL: http://mulhern.fedorapeople.org/python-pyprocdev/python-pyprocdev-0.2-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Pythonic interface to /proc/devices. Fedora Account System Username: mulhern koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14407783
Why do you use GPLv2 instead of GPLv2+? I don't see a restriction in sources, the LICENSE file clearly says "or later". GNU General Public License v2.0 only GPLv2 GNU General Public License v2.0 or later GPLv2+ Could do the official review in swap with bug #1343738.
Fixed.
After I've already knocked two (2) packages off your list?! Anyway, I took a look at this, and regrettably, window managers are not my thing. Hopefully somebody else in the LXqt SIG will be able to step up.
> BuildRequires: python-setuptools BuildRequries: python2-setuptools > Requires: python-six Requires: python2-six > %{python2_sitelib}/%{srcname}-%{version}-*.egg-info better to add "/" at the end to ensure that it's directory (to be sure that setuptools are used). * Summary for python2- and python3- could use %{summary} which will be taken from main Summary tag. * Description could use "%{summary}. Python X version." * Better if summary doesn't start with "A", "An"
In addition to Igor's remarks that will improve the package : - In setup, you have rm -rf justbases.egg-info but I don't see that file. But you should remove src/pyprocdev.egg-info - You should fix this. summary-ended-with-dot C A tiny library providing a Pythonic interface to /proc/devices. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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. [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". 12 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/1343608-python- pyprocdev/licensecheck.txt [X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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. [-]: 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]: 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 Python: [X]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [X]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [X]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2-pyprocdev , python3-pyprocdev [?]: 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 architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [X]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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 all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-pyprocdev-0.2-1.fc25.noarch.rpm python3-pyprocdev-0.2-1.fc25.noarch.rpm python-pyprocdev-0.2-1.fc25.src.rpm python2-pyprocdev.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) proc -> crop, prov, pro python2-pyprocdev.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot C A tiny library providing a Pythonic interface to /proc/devices. python2-pyprocdev.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US proc -> crop, prov, pro python3-pyprocdev.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) proc -> crop, prov, pro python3-pyprocdev.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot C A tiny library providing a Pythonic interface to /proc/devices. python3-pyprocdev.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US proc -> crop, prov, pro python-pyprocdev.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) proc -> crop, prov, pro python-pyprocdev.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot C A tiny library providing a Pythonic interface to /proc/devices. python-pyprocdev.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US proc -> crop, prov, pro 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.18 starting (python version = 3.5.1)... 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 Mock Version: 1.2.18 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.18 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): rpmlint 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 rpmlint Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /tmp/1343608-python-pyprocdev/srpm/python-pyprocdev.spec 2016-07-08 19:09:12.311887407 +0200 +++ /tmp/1343608-python-pyprocdev/srpm-unpacked/python-pyprocdev.spec 2016-06-07 16:19:17.000000000 +0200 @@ -5,5 +5,5 @@ Summary: A tiny library providing a Pythonic interface to /proc/devices. -License: GPLv2+ +License: GPLv2 URL: http://pypi.python.org/pypi/%{srcname} Source0: https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/%{srcname}/%{srcname}-%{version}.tar.gz Requires -------- python2-pyprocdev (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python-six python3-pyprocdev (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-six Provides -------- python2-pyprocdev: python-pyprocdev python2-pyprocdev python3-pyprocdev: python3-pyprocdev Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/pyprocdev/pyprocdev-0.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e42e75c2a9264f6354526115e36d3631649d365928dd6da280fc0fc994daa06d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e42e75c2a9264f6354526115e36d3631649d365928dd6da280fc0fc994daa06d Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1343608 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #4) > > BuildRequires: python-setuptools > BuildRequries: python2-setuptools > > > Requires: python-six > Requires: python2-six > The python2-* variants do not exist for these packages on f24.
(In reply to mulhern from comment #6) > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #4) > > > BuildRequires: python-setuptools > > BuildRequries: python2-setuptools > > > > > Requires: python-six > > Requires: python2-six > > > The python2-* variants do not exist for these packages on f24. they do. $ rpm -q --provides python-six python-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 python2-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 $ rpm -q --provides python2-setuptools python-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 python2-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24
(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #7) > (In reply to mulhern from comment #6) > > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #4) > > > > BuildRequires: python-setuptools > > > BuildRequries: python2-setuptools > > > > > > > Requires: python-six > > > Requires: python2-six > > > > > The python2-* variants do not exist for these packages on f24. > > they do. > > $ rpm -q --provides python-six > python-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > python2-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > $ rpm -q --provides python2-setuptools > python-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 > python2-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 Sorry, I meant f23.
(In reply to mulhern from comment #8) > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #7) > > (In reply to mulhern from comment #6) > > > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #4) > > > > > BuildRequires: python-setuptools > > > > BuildRequries: python2-setuptools > > > > > > > > > Requires: python-six > > > > Requires: python2-six > > > > > > > The python2-* variants do not exist for these packages on f24. > > > > they do. > > > > $ rpm -q --provides python-six > > python-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > > python2-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > > $ rpm -q --provides python2-setuptools > > python-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 > > python2-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 > > Sorry, I meant f23. Hmmm, I think I'm looking at a dnf bug/feature. [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf info python2-six Last metadata expiration check: 1:22:41 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. Error: No matching Packages to list [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf info python-six Last metadata expiration check: 1:23:27 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. Installed Packages Name : python-six Arch : noarch ... [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf install python-six Last metadata expiration check: 1:24:15 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. Package python-six-1.9.0-3.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete! [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf install python2-six Last metadata expiration check: 1:24:20 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. Package python-six-1.9.0-3.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. Dependencies resolved. Nothing to do. Complete!
(In reply to mulhern from comment #9) > (In reply to mulhern from comment #8) > > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #7) > > > (In reply to mulhern from comment #6) > > > > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #4) > > > > > > BuildRequires: python-setuptools > > > > > BuildRequries: python2-setuptools > > > > > > > > > > > Requires: python-six > > > > > Requires: python2-six > > > > > > > > > The python2-* variants do not exist for these packages on f24. > > > > > > they do. > > > > > > $ rpm -q --provides python-six > > > python-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > > > python2-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > > > $ rpm -q --provides python2-setuptools > > > python-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 > > > python2-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 > > > > Sorry, I meant f23. > > Hmmm, I think I'm looking at a dnf bug/feature. > > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf info python2-six > Last metadata expiration check: 1:22:41 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > Error: No matching Packages to list > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf info python-six > Last metadata expiration check: 1:23:27 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > Installed Packages > Name : python-six > Arch : noarch > ... > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf install python-six > Last metadata expiration check: 1:24:15 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > Package python-six-1.9.0-3.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. > Dependencies resolved. > Nothing to do. > Complete! > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf install python2-six > Last metadata expiration check: 1:24:20 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > Package python-six-1.9.0-3.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. > Dependencies resolved. > Nothing to do. > Complete! dnf info by default works only by name, not by provides. though we wanted to fix this in future. anyway, even on f23 there is python2-setuptools and python2-six.
(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #10) > (In reply to mulhern from comment #9) > > (In reply to mulhern from comment #8) > > > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #7) > > > > (In reply to mulhern from comment #6) > > > > > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #4) > > > > > > > BuildRequires: python-setuptools > > > > > > BuildRequries: python2-setuptools > > > > > > > > > > > > > Requires: python-six > > > > > > Requires: python2-six > > > > > > > > > > > The python2-* variants do not exist for these packages on f24. > > > > > > > > they do. > > > > > > > > $ rpm -q --provides python-six > > > > python-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > > > > python2-six = 1.10.0-2.fc24 > > > > $ rpm -q --provides python2-setuptools > > > > python-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 > > > > python2-setuptools = 20.1.1-1.fc24 > > > > > > Sorry, I meant f23. > > > > Hmmm, I think I'm looking at a dnf bug/feature. > > > > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf info python2-six > > Last metadata expiration check: 1:22:41 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > > Error: No matching Packages to list > > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf info python-six > > Last metadata expiration check: 1:23:27 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > > Installed Packages > > Name : python-six > > Arch : noarch > > ... > > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf install python-six > > Last metadata expiration check: 1:24:15 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > > Package python-six-1.9.0-3.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. > > Dependencies resolved. > > Nothing to do. > > Complete! > > [root@dhcp-25-209 pyprocdev]# dnf install python2-six > > Last metadata expiration check: 1:24:20 ago on Mon Jul 11 07:58:02 2016. > > Package python-six-1.9.0-3.fc23.noarch is already installed, skipping. > > Dependencies resolved. > > Nothing to do. > > Complete! > > dnf info by default works only by name, not by provides. though we wanted to > fix this in future. anyway, even on f23 there is python2-setuptools and > python2-six. Yeah, hope that happens someday...anyway, I see it now.
New build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14859863. Fixes applied.
Looks good. Approved!
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-pyprocdev