Spec URL: https://gitlab.com/terrycloth/packaging-python-djvulibre/uploads/ce76e5c4cd2cc131f47066128cd39c81/python-djvulibre.spec SRPM URL: https://gitlab.com/terrycloth/packaging-python-djvulibre/uploads/6cc66733cd0dda9b794113a79fa0938d/python-djvulibre-0.8.5-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: python-djvulibre is a set of Python bindings for the DjVuLibre library, an open source implementation of DjVu. Fedora Account System Username: terrycloth
NOTE this is a work-in-progress package spec, for an optional library to provide DjVu support to the ebook reader in Lector -- whose package is also a work in progress... See Bug #1785069.
- Capitalize the summary: python-djvulibre-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C python-djvulibre documentation Package approved. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. 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", "GPL (v2)". 23 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-djvulibre/review-python- djvulibre/licensecheck.txt [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 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]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [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 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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files [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 python3-djvulibre [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: 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 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: python3-djvulibre-0.8.5-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm python-djvulibre-doc-0.8.5-1.fc32.noarch.rpm python-djvulibre-debugsource-0.8.5-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm python-djvulibre-0.8.5-1.fc32.src.rpm python3-djvulibre.x86_64: W: no-documentation python-djvulibre-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C python-djvulibre documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9170
Sorry for the long radio silence, I've had some special projects at my dayjob eating all my time... python-djvulibre was unretired, but I can't seem to push to the repository, and I don't understand why. Since y'all have been helpful getting the package started, I'm hoping you won't mind explaining what's wrong here. The git remote URL looks correct, and the python-djvulibre package is listed as mine on src.fedoraproject.org. ↪ git remote --verbose local ~/backups/repos/packaging/python-djvulibre/ (fetch) local ~/backups/repos/packaging/python-djvulibre/ (push) production ssh://terrycloth.org/rpms/python-djvulibre.git (fetch) production ssh://terrycloth.org/rpms/python-djvulibre.git (push) https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-djvulibre But when I try to push, I get this error. ↪ git push --set-upstream production Enumerating objects: 21, done. Counting objects: 100% (21/21), done. Delta compression using up to 12 threads Compressing objects: 100% (16/16), done. Writing objects: 100% (17/17), 7.31 KiB | 7.31 MiB/s, done. Total 17 (delta 3), reused 0 (delta 0) remote: Branch refs/heads/master is unsupported remote: Denied push for ref 'refs/heads/master' for user 'terrycloth' remote: All changes have been rejected To ssh://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-djvulibre.git ! [remote rejected] master -> master (pre-receive hook declined) error: failed to push some refs to 'ssh://terrycloth.org/rpms/python-djvulibre.git' "Branch ...master is unsupported" sounds to me like the 'master' branch is missing or somehow locked? Except it does exist on src.fedoraproject.org, and I don't see anything in the repo settings that would explain this. So I'm not sure if RelEng neglected to set up some repo permissions when unretiring the package, or if I've somehow misconfigured something just for this one repo.
Okay, Miro Hrončok (FAS: churchyard) says there was indeed something incorrect about how the package was unretired. https://pagure.io/releng/issue/9170 So hopefully that will be fixed soon.
python-djvulibre finally got branches added, though now most of those branches fail to build on Koji, so I guess I've got some more work to do before the package gets a general audience release...
Okay, finally, all branches build successfully. Packages for f31 through Rawhide are pending in Bodhi.