Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ngompa/manafirewall/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02059293-manafirewall/manafirewall.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ngompa/manafirewall/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02059293-manafirewall/manafirewall-0.0.1-4.fc35.src.rpm Description: manafirewall is the graphical configuration tool for firewalld based on python manatools and libYui (Suse widget abstraction library), to be run using Qt 5, GTK+ 3, or ncurses interfaces. Fedora Account System Username: ngompa
Items to fix: - License field doesn't match the actual license. - Changelog not in prescribed format. - Mixed use of spaces and tabs. - Unowned directories: - /usr/share/locale/es_419 - /usr/share/locale/pa_IN/LC_MESSAGES - /usr/share/locale/pa_IN - /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES - rpmlint: incorrect-locale-subdir /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo - rpmlint: invalid-lc-messages-dir /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo
Addressed most of the feedback with a new release. Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ngompa/manafirewall/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02073994-manafirewall/manafirewall.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ngompa/manafirewall/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02073994-manafirewall/manafirewall-0.0.2-1.fc35.src.rpm
(In reply to Carl George 🤠 from comment #1) > Items to fix: > > - License field doesn't match the actual license. Fixed upstream and in the packaging. > - Changelog not in prescribed format. This package is forked from Mageia, I'd rather leave their changelog entries as-is, even if they're not _exactly_ correct. > - Mixed use of spaces and tabs. This should be fixed now. > - Unowned directories: > - /usr/share/locale/es_419 > - /usr/share/locale/pa_IN/LC_MESSAGES > - /usr/share/locale/pa_IN > - /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES > - rpmlint: incorrect-locale-subdir > /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo > - rpmlint: invalid-lc-messages-dir > /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo This seems to be a bug in the base system, since those are valid locales, and all of that was populated by %find_lang.
Filed a bug against filesystem for the missing directories as bug 1939724.
Preserving the Mageia changelog entries is understandable. Thanks for filing that filesystem bug. Package approved. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [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 General Public License, Version 2". 134 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/carl/packaging/reviews/manafirewall/copr-build-2073994/review- manafirewall/licensecheck.txt [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES, /usr/share/locale/pa_IN, /usr/share/locale/es_419, /usr/share/locale/pa_IN/LC_MESSAGES [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/locale/es_419, /usr/share/locale/pa_IN, /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES, /usr/share/locale/pa_IN/LC_MESSAGES [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [!]: 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. [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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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 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 Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: 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: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [-]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: manafirewall-0.0.2-1.fc35.noarch.rpm manafirewall-0.0.2-1.fc35.src.rpm manafirewall.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency libyui-mga-ncurses manafirewall.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency libyui-ncurses manafirewall.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US manatools -> anatomist manafirewall.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libYui -> Libby manafirewall.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses manafirewall.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary manafirewall manafirewall.noarch: E: incorrect-locale-subdir /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo manafirewall.noarch: E: invalid-lc-messages-dir /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo manafirewall.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US firewalld -> firewalls, firewall, firewall d manafirewall.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US manatools -> anatomist manafirewall.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libYui -> Libby manafirewall.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 8 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- manafirewall.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency libyui-mga-ncurses manafirewall.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency libyui-ncurses manafirewall.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US manatools -> anatomist manafirewall.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libYui -> Libby manafirewall.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ncurses -> nurses, curses, n curses manafirewall.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary manafirewall manafirewall.noarch: E: incorrect-locale-subdir /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo manafirewall.noarch: E: invalid-lc-messages-dir /usr/share/locale/es_419/LC_MESSAGES/manafirewall.mo 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 4 warnings.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/manafirewall
FEDORA-2021-9867a3782a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-9867a3782a
FEDORA-2021-9867a3782a has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-9867a3782a \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-9867a3782a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2021-9867a3782a has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.