Bug 1622125 - Review Request: lxqt-themes-fedora - Fedora LxQT themes
Summary: Review Request: lxqt-themes-fedora - Fedora LxQT themes
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin 🐧
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1581463
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2018-08-24 13:49 UTC by Zamir SUN
Modified: 2018-08-25 01:55 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-08-25 01:52:49 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
eclipseo: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Zamir SUN 2018-08-24 13:49:30 UTC
Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/lxqt/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00790491-lxqt-themes-fedora/lxqt-themes-fedora.spec
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/zsun/lxqt/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00790491-lxqt-themes-fedora/lxqt-themes-fedora-1.0-0.2.fc30.src.rpm
Description: Fedora LxQT Themes
Fedora Account System Username: zsun

Note: This is Fedora only and Pagure do not provide tarballs yet (at least I did not find it)

Comment 1 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-08-24 15:10:14 UTC
 - make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} → %make_install

 - add a comment explaining how you generated the tarball


Package approved.


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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "CC by-sa (v3.0)", "*No copyright* CC by-
     sa", "Unknown or generated". 22 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/lxqt-themes-
     fedora/review-lxqt-themes-fedora/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[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.
[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.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in lxqt-
     themes-fedora-sddm
[?]: 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]: 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]: 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
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: lxqt-themes-fedora-1.0-0.2.fc30.noarch.rpm
          lxqt-themes-fedora-sddm-1.0-0.2.fc30.noarch.rpm
          lxqt-themes-fedora-1.0-0.2.fc30.src.rpm
lxqt-themes-fedora.noarch: W: no-documentation
lxqt-themes-fedora.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/lxqt/themes/fedora-lxqt/mainmenu.svg /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/places/start-here.svg
lxqt-themes-fedora.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/lxqt/themes/fedora-lxqt/spacer-plugin/spacer-dots.svg ../../../graphics/spacer-dark-dots.svg
lxqt-themes-fedora.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/lxqt/themes/fedora-lxqt/spacer-plugin/spacer-line.svg ../../../graphics/spacer-dark-line.svg
lxqt-themes-fedora-sddm.noarch: W: no-documentation
lxqt-themes-fedora.src: W: invalid-url Source0: lxqt-themes-fedora-1.0.tar.xz
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

Comment 2 Gwyn Ciesla 2018-08-24 16:04:15 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/lxqt-themes-fedora

Comment 3 Raphael Groner 2018-08-24 16:41:42 UTC
This review is useless, because:

1. There's no upstream. We track the source tarball in Fedora git.
2. It can be seen as a patch to extend lxqt-themes, the other review is bug #1622122.

> Require: lxqt-themes

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Fedora-specific_.28or_rejected_upstream.29_patches

My vote goes against importing this package. If already done, please retire.

Comment 4 Zamir SUN 2018-08-25 01:52:49 UTC
Fixed and build. Thanks!

Comment 5 Zamir SUN 2018-08-25 01:55:02 UTC
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #3)
> This review is useless, because:
> 
> 1. There's no upstream. We track the source tarball in Fedora git.
> 2. It can be seen as a patch to extend lxqt-themes, the other review is bug
> #1622122.
> 
> > Require: lxqt-themes
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Fedora-specific_.
> 28or_rejected_upstream.29_patches
> 
> My vote goes against importing this package. If already done, please retire.

Emm, sorry I did not see this before closing.

For now I won't make it in comps. Let's discuss this by email.


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