Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dulsi/anagramarama/master/anagramarama.spec SRPM URL: http://identicalsoftware.com/anagramarama/anagramarama-0.5-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Anagramarama is a simple wordgame in which one tries to guess all the different permutations of a scrambled word which form another word within the time limit. Guess the original word and you move on to the next level. Fedora Account System Username: dulsi
> %install > ... > desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/anagramarama.desktop > appstream-util validate-relax --nonet %{buildroot}%{_metainfodir}/anagramarama.metainfo.xml I'd argue these two should go in %check. > %files > ... > %{_datadir}/man/man6/anagramarama.6.gz Do not assume man pages will be gzipped. Use a wildcard that can match any compression method (including no compression). https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_manpages > %files > %{_datadir}/anagramarama This directory is almost 10MiB in size. I'd consider separating it into an "anagramarama-data" sub-package.
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dulsi/anagramarama/master/anagramarama.spec SRPM URL: http://identicalsoftware.com/anagramarama/anagramarama-0.5-2.fc34.src.rpm Commands are moved to check. Man page uses the wildcard. I have not broken it into a sub-package. The images are uncompressed bmp. While large on disk, the source package is 3MB and x86_64 package is 730K. If I modify it I would probably modify the program to use SDL_image and change the images to png. A quick test found one image at 1.4MB would become 71K.
The upstream source seems to have changed, as there's a mismatch in the files downloaded from the Source0 URL and the one found in the SRPM. > file-size-mismatch anagramarama-0.5.tgz = 3354064, http://identicalsoftware.com/anagramarama//anagramarama-0.5.tgz = 1183981 > License: GPLv2+ The README mentions some files are licensed under CC-BY-3.0. This is not reflected in the License field. > %files > ... > %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/anagramarama.png > %{_metainfodir}/%{name}.metainfo.xml Mixed usage of "%{name}" and "anagramarama". Please use one or the other.
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dulsi/anagramarama/master/anagramarama.spec SRPM URL: http://identicalsoftware.com/anagramarama/anagramarama-0.5-3.fc34.src.rpm Upstream source is correct. It was always that size. I tested the spec before release with a handmade tgz of the source. It included the .git directory hence the larger size. I must not have copied the real tgz over and rebuilt after the release was made. This new srpm is built with the released tgz file.
> E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/anagramarama/gpl.txt Since you're also the upstream - pls fix. fedora-review suggests putting the images in a noarch package, as I did before. I'll leave it for you to decide. Apart from these two minor issues, package is fine. 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]: 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [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 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]: 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 ===== 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. [x]: 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. NOTE: Link to successful scratch build in koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=75660139 [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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 10014720 bytes in /usr/share anagramarama-0.5-3.fc36.x86_64.rpm:10014720 See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_Guidelines [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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: anagramarama-0.5-3.fc36.x86_64.rpm anagramarama-debuginfo-0.5-3.fc36.x86_64.rpm anagramarama-debugsource-0.5-3.fc36.x86_64.rpm anagramarama-0.5-3.fc36.src.rpm anagramarama.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wordgame -> word game, word-game, wordage anagramarama.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/anagramarama/gpl.txt anagramarama.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wordgame -> word game, word-game, wordage 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: anagramarama-debuginfo-0.5-3.fc36.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Source checksums ---------------- http://identicalsoftware.com/anagramarama//anagramarama-0.5.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 4162bdd149616479511a9b6fec1ba6f8a030864437b7f0680935c1a5fb7061d6 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 4162bdd149616479511a9b6fec1ba6f8a030864437b7f0680935c1a5fb7061d6 Requires -------- anagramarama (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): hicolor-icon-theme libSDL-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libSDL_mixer-1.2.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgamerzilla.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) anagramarama-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): anagramarama-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- anagramarama: anagramarama anagramarama(x86-64) application() application(anagramarama.desktop) metainfo() metainfo(anagramarama.metainfo.xml) anagramarama-debuginfo: anagramarama-debuginfo anagramarama-debuginfo(x86-64) debuginfo(build-id) anagramarama-debugsource: anagramarama-debugsource anagramarama-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1991064 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic Disabled plugins: Python, Java, Ocaml, PHP, R, Perl, SugarActivity, Haskell, fonts Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/anagramarama