Spec URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//python-cccolutils.spec SRPM URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//python-cccolutils-1.1-1.fc26.src.rpm Description: Python utilities for Kerberos Credential Cache Collections
This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16578849
Spec URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//python-cccolutils.spec SRPM URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//python-cccolutils-1.1-2.fc26.src.rpm Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16580044 - Updated package to follow python guidelines more closely.
Few things I like to suggest here 1) I don't think you will need to have those top 2 python macros lines in the spec file. 2)those 3 comment lines in %install section 3)Good to more verbose in %files sections e.g. %files -n python2-cccolutils %license COPYING %{python2_sitearch}/tests %{python2_sitearch}/cccolutils.so %{python2_sitearch}/CCColUtils-1.1-py?.?.egg-info %if %{with python3} %files -n python3-cccolutils %license COPYING %{python3_sitearch}/tests %{python3_sitearch}/cccolutils.so %{python3_sitearch}/CCColUtils-1.1-py?.?.egg-info %endif # with python3
Currently the package installs tests as well. Is this intentional? If so, shouldn't they be namespaced in some way?
That was not intentional, no, so thanks for pointing that out. I think that that's a bug in my upstream packaging, and I will fix this.
Spec URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//python-cccolutils.spec SRPM URL: http://puiterwijk.fedorapeople.org//python-cccolutils-1.2-1.fc26.src.rpm I also fixed the remarks by Parag.
And a scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16597752
The latest 1.2 tarball is not uploaded to Pagure.
It is now, thanks.
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. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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 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. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. [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. [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. [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: [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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-cccolutils-1.2-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm python3-cccolutils-1.2-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm python-cccolutils-debuginfo-1.2-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm python-cccolutils-1.2-1.fc24.src.rpm python2-cccolutils.x86_64: W: no-documentation python3-cccolutils.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: python-cccolutils-debuginfo-1.2-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- python2-cccolutils.x86_64: W: no-documentation python3-cccolutils.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Requires -------- python2-cccolutils (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libcom_err.so.2()(64bit) libk5crypto.so.3()(64bit) libkrb5.so.3()(64bit) libkrb5.so.3(krb5_3_MIT)(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libpython2.7.so.1.0()(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) python-cccolutils-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python3-cccolutils (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libcom_err.so.2()(64bit) libk5crypto.so.3()(64bit) libkrb5.so.3()(64bit) libkrb5.so.3(krb5_3_MIT)(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libpython3.5m.so.1.0()(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- python2-cccolutils: python2-cccolutils python2-cccolutils(x86-64) python-cccolutils-debuginfo: python-cccolutils-debuginfo python-cccolutils-debuginfo(x86-64) python3-cccolutils: python3-cccolutils python3-cccolutils(x86-64) Unversioned so-files -------------------- python2-cccolutils: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/cccolutils.so python3-cccolutils: /usr/lib64/python3.5/site-packages/cccolutils.cpython-35m-x86_64-linux-gnu.so Source checksums ---------------- https://pagure.io/releases/cccolutils/CCColUtils-1.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b0a36351af7a14978ca301af9821a98ea92784ab0ec053e7f20570359a7975a2 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b0a36351af7a14978ca301af9821a98ea92784ab0ec053e7f20570359a7975a2 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1397842 Buildroot used: fedora-24-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, SugarActivity, fonts, Haskell, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 Notes ----- The package looks good. It does not currently build for EPEL due to a missing BuildRequires, but that should not block inclusion in Fedora (and should be fixed later). APPROVED
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-cccolutils
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-96a64de312
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6b558aab55
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-aae672950a
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-7d58f0527d
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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-EPEL-2016-96a64de312
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2016-aae672950a
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2016-6b558aab55
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.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-2016-7d58f0527d
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-cccolutils-1.5-1.el6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 6. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-0137e43188
python-cccolutils-1.5-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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-EPEL-2016-0137e43188
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-cccolutils-1.4-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-cccolutils-1.5-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.