Bug 1921408 - Review Request: plasma-firewall - Control Panel for your system firewall
Summary: Review Request: plasma-firewall - Control Panel for your system firewall
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Neal Gompa
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-01-27 23:28 UTC by marcdeop
Modified: 2022-01-20 20:14 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2022-01-20 20:14:22 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
ngompa13: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Patch of improvements to the spec (3.20 KB, patch)
2021-01-29 23:33 UTC, Neal Gompa
no flags Details | Diff
Fixed patch of improvements to the spec (3.30 KB, patch)
2021-01-29 23:36 UTC, Neal Gompa
no flags Details | Diff
Fixed patch of improvements to the spec (3.30 KB, patch)
2021-01-29 23:37 UTC, Neal Gompa
no flags Details | Diff

Description marcdeop 2021-01-27 23:28:29 UTC
Spec URL: https://marcdeop.fedorapeople.org/plasma-firewall.spec
SRPM URL: https://marcdeop.fedorapeople.org/plasma-firewall-5.20.90-4.fc33.src.rpm
Description: Control Panel for your system firewall
Fedora Account System Username: marcdeop

Comment 1 Neal Gompa 2021-01-27 23:40:40 UTC
Taking this review.

Comment 2 marcdeop 2021-01-27 23:42:49 UTC
Output of fedora-review:

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
  BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
  Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
  file-validate if there is such a file.
- 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.
  Note: License file metadata.desktop.license is not marked as %license
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text


===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: Package contains no static executables.
[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:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[ ]: 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", "*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public
     Domain Dedication", "*No copyright* FSF All Permissive License", "GNU
     General Public License, Version 2", "GNU Lesser General Public
     License, Version 3", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License,
     Version 3", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License, Version
     3". 114 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/marc/rpmbuild/SRPMS/plasma-firewall/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/share/kcm_ufw
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/polkit-1/actions,
     /usr/share/polkit-1, /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kcms,
     /usr/share/dbus-1/system.d, /usr/share/dbus-1/system-services,
     /usr/share/dbus-1, /usr/share/kcm_ufw
[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[ ]: 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]: 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 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]: 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.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: 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]: 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.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: plasma-firewall-5.20.90-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-debuginfo-5.20.90-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-debugsource-5.20.90-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-5.20.90-1.fc34.src.rpm
plasma-firewall.x86_64: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
plasma-firewall.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libkcm_firewall_core.so libkcm_firewall_core.so
plasma-firewall.x86_64: W: no-documentation
plasma-firewall-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
plasma-firewall-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
plasma-firewall.src: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: plasma-firewall-debuginfo-5.20.90-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
plasma-firewall-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
plasma-firewall-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
plasma-firewall.x86_64: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
plasma-firewall.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libkcm_firewall_core.so libkcm_firewall_core.so
plasma-firewall.x86_64: W: no-documentation
plasma-firewall-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license BSD-3-Clause
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.



Unversioned so-files
--------------------
plasma-firewall: /usr/lib64/libkcm_firewall_core.so
plasma-firewall: /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kcms/kcm_firewall.so
plasma-firewall: /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kf5/plasma_firewall/firewalldbackend.so
plasma-firewall: /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kf5/plasma_firewall/ufwbackend.so

Source checksums
----------------
http://download.kde.org/unstable/plasma/5.20.90/plasma-firewall-5.20.90.tar.xz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : b3cafaf22ce0add35d460b111ce1df8bb673fccbc10cfe079cf12bd3ae72e527
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b3cafaf22ce0add35d460b111ce1df8bb673fccbc10cfe079cf12bd3ae72e527


Requires
--------
plasma-firewall (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    firewalld
    libKF5AuthCore.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5ConfigCore.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5CoreAddons.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5I18n.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5QuickAddons.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.15)(64bit)
    libQt5DBus.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5DBus.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Network.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Network.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Qml.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Qml.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libkcm_firewall_core.so()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

plasma-firewall-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

plasma-firewall-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
plasma-firewall:
    libkcm_firewall_core.so()(64bit)
    metainfo()
    metainfo(org.kde.plasma.firewall.metainfo.xml)
    plasma-firewall
    plasma-firewall(x86-64)

plasma-firewall-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    plasma-firewall-debuginfo
    plasma-firewall-debuginfo(x86-64)

plasma-firewall-debugsource:
    plasma-firewall-debugsource
    plasma-firewall-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n plasma-firewall -r
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Python, Perl, PHP, R, SugarActivity, Ocaml, fonts, Haskell, Java
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 3 Neal Gompa 2021-01-27 23:47:02 UTC
Initial pass through the spec:

> License: BSD-3-Clause

License tag should be just "BSD", per the approved "short name" on the license list.

Cf. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Software_License_List

Comment 4 marcdeop 2021-01-27 23:54:14 UTC
I was using an identifier from here: https://spdx.org/licenses/

Happy to change it to something Fedora accepts :-)

Updated the spec and srpm files

Comment 5 Neal Gompa 2021-01-28 01:34:17 UTC
You're missing the following things in your spec:

* BuildRequires: gcc-c++
* BuildRequires: make

Comment 6 marcdeop 2021-01-28 10:06:49 UTC
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #5)
> You're missing the following things in your spec:
> 
> * BuildRequires: gcc-c++

Is that really needed? I don't see that in other plasma spec files.

> * BuildRequires: make

Wouldn't that better be "cmake" instead of "make"?

Comment 7 Neal Gompa 2021-01-28 18:58:49 UTC
(In reply to marcdeop from comment #6)
> (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #5)
> > You're missing the following things in your spec:
> > 
> > * BuildRequires: gcc-c++
> 
> Is that really needed? I don't see that in other plasma spec files.
> 

It is, since we do not guarantee a compiler in the build environment.

> > * BuildRequires: make
> 
> Wouldn't that better be "cmake" instead of "make"?

Both are required.

Comment 8 marcdeop 2021-01-28 19:09:48 UTC
Updated

Comment 9 Rex Dieter 2021-01-29 22:04:17 UTC
FYI,
        make is needed by (installed) cmake-3.18.4-2.fc33.x86_64
        gcc-c++ is needed by (installed) kf5-rpm-macros-5.78.0-1.fc33.noarch

gcc-c++ and make are ensured for any kf5/plasma pkg already.

Comment 10 Neal Gompa 2021-01-29 23:33:41 UTC
Created attachment 1752166 [details]
Patch of improvements to the spec

I noticed a significant degree of issues from fedora-review related to how plasma-firewall ships both firewalld and ufw backends, and I made some changes in the form of a patch to the spec that you should consider incorporating.

Comment 11 Neal Gompa 2021-01-29 23:36:23 UTC
Created attachment 1752167 [details]
Fixed patch of improvements to the spec

Oops, missing requires to base package...

Comment 12 Neal Gompa 2021-01-29 23:37:26 UTC
Created attachment 1752168 [details]
Fixed patch of improvements to the spec

Comment 13 Neal Gompa 2021-01-31 04:12:44 UTC
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


Issues:
=======
- Package installs properly.
  Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
  file-validate if there is such a file.
- 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.
  Note: License file metadata.desktop.license is not marked as %license
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text


===== 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.

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", "*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public
     Domain Dedication", "*No copyright* FSF All Permissive License", "GNU
     General Public License, Version 2", "GNU Lesser General Public
     License, Version 3", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License,
     Version 3", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License, Version
     3". 114 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/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.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[!]: 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]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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]: 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 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]: 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).
[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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[-]: 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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

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

Generic:
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: Mock build failed
     See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
     guidelines/#_use_rpmlint
[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.


Installation errors
-------------------
INFO: mock.py version 2.8 starting (python version = 3.9.1, NVR = mock-2.8-1.fc33)...
Start: init plugins
INFO: selinux enabled
Finish: init plugins
INFO: Signal handler active
Start: run
Start: chroot init
INFO: calling preinit hooks
INFO: enabled root cache
INFO: enabled package manager cache
Start: cleaning package manager metadata
Finish: cleaning package manager metadata
INFO: enabled HW Info plugin
Mock Version: 2.8
INFO: Mock Version: 2.8
Finish: chroot init
INFO: installing package(s): /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-debuginfo-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-ufw-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-firewalld-debuginfo-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-ufw-debuginfo-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-debugsource-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-firewalld-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm
ERROR: Command failed: 
 # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 34 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk install /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-debuginfo-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-ufw-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-firewalld-debuginfo-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-ufw-debuginfo-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-debugsource-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-firewalld-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm /home/ngompa/1921408-plasma-firewall/results/plasma-firewall-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts



Rpmlint
-------
Checking: plasma-firewall-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-firewalld-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-ufw-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-debuginfo-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-debugsource-5.20.90-4.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          plasma-firewall-5.20.90-4.fc34.src.rpm
plasma-firewall.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libkcm_firewall_core.so libkcm_firewall_core.so
plasma-firewall.x86_64: W: no-documentation
plasma-firewall-firewalld.x86_64: W: no-documentation
plasma-firewall-ufw.x86_64: W: no-documentation
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.




Unversioned so-files
--------------------
plasma-firewall: /usr/lib64/libkcm_firewall_core.so
plasma-firewall: /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kcms/kcm_firewall.so
plasma-firewall-firewalld: /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kf5/plasma_firewall/firewalldbackend.so
plasma-firewall-ufw: /usr/lib64/qt5/plugins/kf5/plasma_firewall/ufwbackend.so

Source checksums
----------------
http://download.kde.org/unstable/plasma/5.20.90/plasma-firewall-5.20.90.tar.xz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : b3cafaf22ce0add35d460b111ce1df8bb673fccbc10cfe079cf12bd3ae72e527
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b3cafaf22ce0add35d460b111ce1df8bb673fccbc10cfe079cf12bd3ae72e527


Requires
--------
plasma-firewall (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    kf5-kcmutils(x86-64)
    libKF5CoreAddons.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5I18n.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5QuickAddons.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.15)(64bit)
    libQt5Network.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Network.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Qml.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Qml.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libkcm_firewall_core.so()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    plasma-firewall-backend
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

plasma-firewall-firewalld (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    firewalld
    libKF5CoreAddons.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5I18n.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.15)(64bit)
    libQt5DBus.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5DBus.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libkcm_firewall_core.so()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    plasma-firewall(x86-64)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

plasma-firewall-ufw (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    dbus-common
    libKF5AuthCore.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5ConfigCore.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5CoreAddons.so.5()(64bit)
    libKF5I18n.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.15)(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libkcm_firewall_core.so()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    plasma-firewall(x86-64)
    polkit
    rtld(GNU_HASH)
    ufw

plasma-firewall-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

plasma-firewall-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
plasma-firewall:
    libkcm_firewall_core.so()(64bit)
    metainfo()
    metainfo(org.kde.plasma.firewall.metainfo.xml)
    plasma-firewall
    plasma-firewall(x86-64)

plasma-firewall-firewalld:
    plasma-firewall-backend
    plasma-firewall-firewalld
    plasma-firewall-firewalld(x86-64)

plasma-firewall-ufw:
    plasma-firewall-backend
    plasma-firewall-ufw
    plasma-firewall-ufw(x86-64)

plasma-firewall-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    plasma-firewall-debuginfo
    plasma-firewall-debuginfo(x86-64)

plasma-firewall-debugsource:
    plasma-firewall-debugsource
    plasma-firewall-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1921408 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: R, fonts, Haskell, Java, Python, SugarActivity, Perl, Ocaml, PHP
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 14 Neal Gompa 2021-01-31 04:19:00 UTC
Review notes:

* The install failure is expected, since two subpackages explicitly conflict with each other. Otherwise it's fine.
* No desktop files are install to /usr/share/applications to validate, so this is a false positive too
* License files are correctly installed and marked accordngly

Everything else looks good now, so...

PACKAGE APPROVED.

Comment 15 Mohan Boddu 2021-02-02 20:51:08 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/plasma-firewall

Comment 16 Mattia Verga 2022-01-20 20:14:22 UTC
Package is in current Fedora release, closing ticket.


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