Spec URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/openelp/openelp.spec SRPM URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/openelp/openelp-0.7.2-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: OpenELP is an open source EchoLink proxy for Linux and Windows. It aims to be efficient and maintain a small footprint, while still implementing all of the features present in the official EchoLink proxy. Fedora Account System Username: cottsay Target branches: f32 f31 epel8 epel7 Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45506439 rpmlint output: 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Updated to the latest release: Spec URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/openelp/openelp.spec SRPM URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/openelp/openelp-0.8.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45882807
- Use %ldconfig_post or %ldconfig_postun instead of direct /sbin/ldconfig. This is only needed for EPEL7, F31/32/33/EPEL8 do not require it anymore. - test -f /usr/bin/firewall-cmd && firewall-cmd --reload --quiet || : → %firewalld_reload Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issues before import. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. Note: /sbin/ldconfig called in openelp See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Removing_ldconfig_scriptlets ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. 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", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License", "Public domain". 32 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/openelp/review- openelp/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. [x]: 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. [x]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 593920 bytes in 104 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 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [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]: No %config files under /usr. [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]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in openelp [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. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in openelp- devel [?]: 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 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: openelp-0.8.0-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm openelp-devel-0.8.0-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm openelp-debuginfo-0.8.0-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm openelp-debugsource-0.8.0-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm openelp-0.8.0-1.fc33.src.rpm openelp.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /etc/ELProxy.conf openelp openelp.x86_64: E: non-readable /etc/ELProxy.conf 640 openelp.src:69: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/firewalld/services/%{name}.xml openelp.src:101: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/firewalld/services/%{name}.xml 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 1 warnings.
> Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issues before import. Done. Thank you!
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openelp
FEDORA-2020-12aeb91375 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-12aeb91375
FEDORA-2020-788631a28f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-788631a28f
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-ac49ceb431 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-ac49ceb431 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-b4c6cd8122 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2020-b4c6cd8122 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-12aeb91375 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-12aeb91375 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-12aeb91375 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-788631a28f has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-788631a28f \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-788631a28f See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-788631a28f has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2020-12aeb91375 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-ac49ceb431 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-EPEL-2020-b4c6cd8122 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.