Bug 1877893 (dbus-parsec) - Review Request: dbus-parsec - DBus PARSEC interface
Summary: Review Request: dbus-parsec - DBus PARSEC interface
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: dbus-parsec
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jared Smith
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: rust-parsec-client
Blocks: PARSEC
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-09-10 16:59 UTC by Peter Robinson
Modified: 2020-09-21 20:49 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-09-11 16:34:28 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:
jsmith.fedora: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Peter Robinson 2020-09-10 16:59:07 UTC
SPEC: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/dbus-parsec.spec
SRPM: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/dbus-parsec-0.2.0-1.fc32.src.rpm

Description:
DBus PARSEC interface

FAS: pbrobinson

Comment 1 Jared Smith 2020-09-11 14:31:26 UTC
Package is 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: "Unknown or generated", "European Union Public License 1.2". 4
     files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /tmp/1877893-dbus-parsec/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 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 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]: 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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).
[x]: 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]: %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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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: dbus-parsec-0.2.0-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          dbus-parsec-debuginfo-0.2.0-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          dbus-parsec-debugsource-0.2.0-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          dbus-parsec-0.2.0-1.fc34.src.rpm
dbus-parsec.x86_64: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
dbus-parsec.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dbus-parsec
dbus-parsec-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
dbus-parsec-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
dbus-parsec.src: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: dbus-parsec-debuginfo-0.2.0-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
dbus-parsec-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
dbus-parsec-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
dbus-parsec-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/fedora-iot/dbus-parsec <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
dbus-parsec-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
dbus-parsec-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/fedora-iot/dbus-parsec <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
dbus-parsec.x86_64: W: invalid-license EUPL 1.2
dbus-parsec.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/fedora-iot/dbus-parsec <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
dbus-parsec.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dbus-parsec
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/fedora-iot/dbus-parsec/archive/v0.2.0/dbus-parsec-0.2.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 18e092fbf7c11d32f8e66bf7a5c08a17ca030457b993d4a341d1dcbac5b09dd9
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 18e092fbf7c11d32f8e66bf7a5c08a17ca030457b993d4a341d1dcbac5b09dd9


Requires
--------
dbus-parsec (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libdbus-1.so.3()(64bit)
    libdbus-1.so.3(LIBDBUS_1_3)(64bit)
    libdl.so.2()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.2.0)(64bit)
    libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)
    systemd

dbus-parsec-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

dbus-parsec-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
dbus-parsec:
    dbus-parsec
    dbus-parsec(x86-64)

dbus-parsec-debuginfo:
    dbus-parsec-debuginfo
    dbus-parsec-debuginfo(x86-64)
    debuginfo(build-id)

dbus-parsec-debugsource:
    dbus-parsec-debugsource
    dbus-parsec-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1877893
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, Ocaml, R, Perl, C/C++, SugarActivity, Haskell, fonts, Python, Java
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 2 Gwyn Ciesla 2020-09-11 14:38:45 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dbus-parsec

Comment 3 Fedora Update System 2020-09-17 12:16:43 UTC
FEDORA-2020-91532104d0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-91532104d0

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2020-09-17 17:55:12 UTC
FEDORA-2020-91532104d0 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-91532104d0`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-91532104d0

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2020-09-21 20:49:05 UTC
FEDORA-2020-91532104d0 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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