Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/plasma-mobile-apps/blob/master/f/qmlconsole/qmlconsole.spec SRPM URL: https://pagure.io/plasma-mobile-apps/blob/master/f/qmlconsole/qmlkonsole-21.05-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Terminal app for Plasma Mobile Fedora Account System Username: thunderbirdtr
- Bump to 21.06 - Remove trailing spaces - Just use one of these: appstream-util validate-relax --nonet%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/metainfo/org.kde.mobile.%{name}.appdata.xml ||: appstreamcli validate --no-net %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/metainfo/org.kde.mobile.%{name}.appdata.xml The doc uses appstream-util validate-relax - The correct name is qmlkonsole with a "k": rename this bug and the spec filename to match this. Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue before import. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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. [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. [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]: 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 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). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: 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. [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]: 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: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Bad spec filename: /home/bob/packaging/review/qmlconsole/review- qmlkonsole/srpm-unpacked/qmlconsole.spec See: (this test has no URL) [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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: qmlkonsole-21.05-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm qmlkonsole-debuginfo-21.05-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm qmlkonsole-debugsource-21.05-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm qmlkonsole-21.05-1.fc35.src.rpm qmlkonsole.x86_64: W: no-documentation qmlkonsole.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary qmlkonsole qmlkonsole.src: E: invalid-spec-name 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
https://pagure.io/plasma-mobile-apps/blob/master/f/qmlkonsole/qmlkonsole-21.06-1.fc34.src.rpm https://pagure.io/plasma-mobile-apps/blob/master/f/qmlkonsole/qmlkonsole.spec - Bump to 21.06 ( done ) - Remove trailing spaces ( done ) - Just use one of these: ( done ) appstream-util validate-relax --nonet%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/metainfo/org.kde.mobile.%{name}.appdata.xml ||: appstreamcli validate --no-net %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/metainfo/org.kde.mobile.%{name}.appdata.xml The doc uses appstream-util validate-relax ( understood ) - The correct name is qmlkonsole with a "k": rename this bug and the spec filename to match this. ( done ) Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue before import. Thank you.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qmlkonsole
Package is available in repositories, closing.