Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jgmenu/jgmenu.spec SRPM URL: https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jgmenu/jgmenu-4.2.1-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: A simple, independent, contemporary-looking X11 menu, designed for scripting, ricing and tweaking. Useful for tint2, polymenu, cairo-dock, plank, unity, openbox, i3, dwm and other light environments. Koji builds: f31: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45555882 f32: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45555935 f33: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45555994 Fedora Account System Username: tieugene
Just glanced over the spec: - AUTHORS.md CONTRIBUTING.md INSTALL.md NEWS.md are imho not worth being added to the final rpm as %doc, skip them - use %make_build instead of %{__make} %{?_smp_mflags} (double underscore macros are considered rpm internal and should be avoided) - why is there a hash before `--with-lx --with-pmenu --with-gtktheme --with-xfce4-panel-applet`? - upstream has tests, can you add them to %check? I'll try to take a closer look in the next few days. If I forget, please ping me. Also, as this is a package intended for i3, would you be interested in joining forces in the i3 SIG (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/i3)?
(In reply to dan.cermak from comment #1) > Just glanced over the spec: > - AUTHORS.md CONTRIBUTING.md INSTALL.md NEWS.md are imho not worth being > added to the final rpm as %doc, skip them Fixed. > - use %make_build instead of %{__make} %{?_smp_mflags} (double underscore > macros are considered rpm internal and should be avoided) Fixed. > - why is there a hash before `--with-lx --with-pmenu --with-gtktheme > --with-xfce4-panel-applet`? It is reminder "Don't forget default flags in next release" Moved to separate comment upper. > - upstream has tests, can you add them to %check? Failed for aarch64: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46246932 Upstream issue created: https://github.com/johanmalm/jgmenu/issues/123 Now 'make test' added, but commented out. Reminder. > I'll try to take a closer look in the next few days. If I forget, please > ping me. Ok. > Also, as this is a package intended for i3, would you be interested > in joining forces in the i3 SIG (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/i3)? I'm "Qt-only" fan (and pure openbox in "turbo mode"). So, thank you, but there is no time. ==== SPEC: https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jgmenu/jgmenu.spec SRPM: https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jgmenu/jgmenu-4.2.1-2.fc32.src.rpm Koji build (f32): https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46247107
- Not needed anymore: %post update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : %postun if [ $1 -eq 0 ] ; then gtk-update-icon-cache %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor &>/dev/null || : fi update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : - Source0: https://github.com/johanmalm/%{name}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz → Source0: https://github.com/johanmalm/%{name}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz - Don't use the .gz extension for man pages but a glob * as compression may change in the future
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #3) > - Not needed anymore: > %post > %postun Fixed. > - Source0: > https://github.com/johanmalm/%{name}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}- > %{version}.tar.gz > → > Source0: > https://github.com/johanmalm/%{name}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}. > tar.gz Fixed. > - Don't use the .gz extension for man pages but a glob * as compression may > change in the future Fixed. ==== SPEC: https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jgmenu/jgmenu.spec (old SPEC: https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jgmenu/jgmenu-4.2.1-2.spec) SRPM: https://tieugene.fedorapeople.org/rpms/jgmenu/jgmenu-4.2.1-3.fc32.src.rpm Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46736299
Package approved. 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. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [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. 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", "GNU Lesser General Public License", "GPL (v2)", "GNU General Public License", "Expat License", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v3 or later)", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v2 or later)", "NTP License (legal disclaimer)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "GNU General Public License (v2)". 363 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/jgmenu/review-jgmenu/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/libexec/jgmenu [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. [-]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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 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]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [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 ===== 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 jgmenu- pmenu , jgmenu-gtktheme [?]: 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. [-]: %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: jgmenu-4.2.1-3.fc33.x86_64.rpm jgmenu-lx-4.2.1-3.fc33.x86_64.rpm jgmenu-pmenu-4.2.1-3.fc33.noarch.rpm jgmenu-gtktheme-4.2.1-3.fc33.noarch.rpm jgmenu-xfce4-4.2.1-3.fc33.x86_64.rpm jgmenu-debuginfo-4.2.1-3.fc33.x86_64.rpm jgmenu-debugsource-4.2.1-3.fc33.x86_64.rpm jgmenu-4.2.1-3.fc33.src.rpm jgmenu.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US polymenu -> poly menu, poly-menu, polymer jgmenu.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US openbox -> open box, open-box, opened jgmenu.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dwm -> dim, dam, DWI jgmenu-gtktheme.noarch: W: no-documentation jgmenu-xfce4.x86_64: W: no-documentation jgmenu.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US polymenu -> poly menu, poly-menu, polymer jgmenu.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US openbox -> open box, open-box, opened jgmenu.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dwm -> dim, dam, DWI 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/jgmenu
FEDORA-2020-368d4a4b1a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-368d4a4b1a
FEDORA-2020-368d4a4b1a 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-2020-368d4a4b1a \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-368d4a4b1a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-368d4a4b1a has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.