Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/main/uniol-fonts.spec SRPM URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/main/uniol-fonts-1.0.0-1.src.rpm Description: Ol Chiki is a modern alphabetic script used to write Santhali language. Fedora Account System Username:mitradranirban I am the upstream developer of the font at https://github.com/mitradranirban/ I am a new packager and will require sponshorship. Copr builds are available at https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/
1) disttag is not present. You need to write Release: 1 as Release: 1%{?dist} Read https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/DistTag/ 2) The Source0 line is not the way it should be written. Read https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/#_using_forges_hosted_revision_control You need to use forge macros then it will be easy to write as Source0: %{forgesource} 3) you should release the tarball in upstream. This is not good to add tarball as a file in upstream git repository. Forge macros usage need commit or tag to be written in SPEC file. 4) Avoid adding too many empty lines
Local building with %dist leads to formation of uniol-fonts-1.0.0-2.fc34.src.rpm as I am running fedora 34 presently; Do I have to do koji build with mock for rawhide ? with the spec showing Source0: %{forgesource} build fails in copr; however it builds successfully if i mention the path to raw tar.gz file in spec The git repository is made for uploading fedora related files only The Main upstream font project is https://mitradranirban/font-uniol
Currently I am unable to open https://mitradranirban/font-uniol Once I see its contents I can provide similar suggestions as I did in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2048456#c18
Sorry for the typo, Upstream font project is https://github.com/mitradranirban/font-uniol and release tag is 1 I created a SPEC https://github.com/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/raw/main/SPECS/uniol-fonts.spec as per your suggestion on forgeurl method, However the build fails in copr - http://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/build/3318946/ I do not know where I went wrong I do not want too mess with the main upstream as that is being used by Debian font group to make their package
Please correct the tag. You tagged version as "1" which should be "1.0.0". Once this is fixed, we can check later how to write SPEC using forge macros.
SPEC https://github.com/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/raw/main/SPECS/uniol-fonts.spec copr build failed to create SRPM https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/build/3322202/
1) You have not retagged from 1 to 1.0.0 yet. 2) I think your tarball does not include 66-0-uniol-fonts.conf and generate.pe file but you are trying to use it. See this is the reason I am telling first learn to host your project files. Then tag and release. 3) correct Source0: {forgesource} to Source0: %{forgesource}
Corrected SPEC as suggested https://github.com/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/raw/main/SPECS/uniol-fonts.spec Also added generate.pe and fontconfig to upstream source and bumped its version and tag to 1.0.1 Still build failed in copr http://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/build/3329041/ May be I should try the alternate method of https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/#_using_forges_hosted_revision_control instead of forgesource
1) You need to use either one as suggested in packaging guidelines. Either commit or tag. If you want to use commit, then gittag line becomes optional. 2) If we use the commit approach then let's check if Source0: is downloadable. wget https://github.com/mitradranirban/font-uniol/fd2431cc7661f68e52d2b32598d720f60ba735ff.tar.gz --2022-02-06 05:53:27-- https://github.com/mitradranirban/font-uniol/fd2431cc7661f68e52d2b32598d720f60ba735ff.tar.gz Resolving github.com (github.com)... 13.234.176.102 Connecting to github.com (github.com)|13.234.176.102|:443... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found 2022-02-06 05:53:28 ERROR 404: Not Found. This mean you have not followed the way github Source used to get downloaded as defined in that guidelines page. Use Source0: https://github.com/mitradranirban/font-uniol/archive/%{commit}/%{name}-%{shortcommit}.tar.gz 3) After you do above fixes, I am able to build this package now. Next we need to check rpmlint on generated srpm and rpms [~/rpmbuild]$ rpmlint SRPMS/uniol-fonts-1.0.1-3.fc35.src.rpm RPMS/noarch/uniol-fonts-1.0.1-3.fc35.noarch.rpm uniol-fonts.spec: E: specfile-error error: %changelog entries must start with * uniol-fonts.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag uniol-fonts.src: E: no-changelogname-tag uniol-fonts.spec:49: W: macro-in-%changelog %forgemeta uniol-fonts.spec:49: W: macro-in-%changelog %forgesource uniol-fonts.spec:62: W: macro-in-%changelog %forgemacro For every macro you write in any Changelog entry you need to add one more % character, hence your %forgemeta becomes %%forgemeta This will prevent to expand that macros in changelog entry when package is built. You forgot to start each changelog entry with "*" character. Also, After you fixed upstream, I can now successfully used forge macros to create this package. But as you find alternate method useful, you can keep it.
SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-35-x86_64/03330411-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts.spec SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-35-x86_64/03330411-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts.spec $ rpmlint uniol-fonts.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm uniol-fonts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Ol -> O, L, Ola uniol-fonts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ued -> ed, used, sued uniol-fonts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US variouss -> various, various s, vagarious Error checking signature of uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm: uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm: digests SIGNATURES NOT OK rpmlint uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.noarch.rpm uniol-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Ol -> O, L, Ola uniol-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ued -> ed, used, sued uniol-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US variouss -> various, various s, vagarious Error checking signature of uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.noarch.rpm: uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.noarch.rpm: digests SIGNATURES NOT OK 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
https://dSPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-35-x86_64/03330411-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts.spec SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-35-x86_64/03330411-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm $ rpmlint uniol-fonts.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm uniol-fonts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Ol -> O, L, Ola uniol-fonts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ued -> ed, used, sued uniol-fonts.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US variouss -> various, various s, vagarious Error checking signature of uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm: uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm: digests SIGNATURES NOT OK rpmlint uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.noarch.rpm uniol-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Ol -> O, L, Ola uniol-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ued -> ed, used, sued uniol-fonts.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US variouss -> various, various s, vagarious Error checking signature of uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.noarch.rpm: uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.noarch.rpm: digests SIGNATURES NOT OK 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
1) You don't need below lines BuildRequires: fontpackages-devel Requires: fontpackages-filesystem These packages does not exists now in Fedora and replaced by fonts-rpm-macros package. 2) You should add one space between "*" and "Sun" in Changelog entries. 3) Also, try to give correct URLs of SPEC and SRPM without error so that I can run fedora-review on this bug.
Made changes as suggested SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-35-x86_64/03330516-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts.spec SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-35-x86_64/03330516-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm Fedora Review done at copr: 'fedora-review', '--no-colors', '--prebuilt', '--rpm-spec', '--name', 'uniol-fonts', '--mock-config', '/var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg'] cwd: /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results rc: 1 stdout: stderr: INFO: Processing local files: uniol-fonts INFO: Getting .spec and .srpm Urls from : Local files in /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results INFO: --> SRPM url: file:///var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/uniol-fonts-1.0.1-5.fc35.src.rpm INFO: Using review directory: /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/uniol-fonts WARNING: No disttag found in prebuilt packages INFO: Use --define DISTTAG to set proper dist. e. g. --define DISTTAG fc21.
You got wrong syntax for disttag. Please check again comment#1 in this bug. You need to use Release: 5%{?dist}
SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/03330673-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts.spec SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mitradranirban/uniol-fonts/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/03330673-uniol-fonts/uniol-fonts-1.0.1-6.fc36.src.rpm Corrected disttag
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]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* SIL Open Font License 1.1", "SIL Open Font License 1.1". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/test/2050295-uniol- fonts/licensecheck.txt [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 [-]: 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. [-]: 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. [-]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [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]: 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: [x]: 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. [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. [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]: 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 ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/mitradranirban/font-uniol/archive/v1.0.1/font-uniol-1.0.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 8a391884c1acda1824eed11983e71a8e49dda67b6ff1a1e02819df18638cb7bf CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8a391884c1acda1824eed11983e71a8e49dda67b6ff1a1e02819df18638cb7bf Requires -------- uniol-fonts (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): config(uniol-fonts) fontpackages-filesystem Provides -------- uniol-fonts: config(uniol-fonts) font(uniol) metainfo() metainfo(org.fedoraproject.uniol-fonts.metainfo.xml) uniol-fonts Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2050295 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, fonts, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, SugarActivity, C/C++, Python, R, Perl, PHP, Ocaml, Haskell Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH This package now looks good. APPROVED.
Thanks for review approval. Please help with the next steps in getting sponsor to get necessary credentials
Sure I will guide you. Let's finish all your 4 package reviews and then I will sponsor you.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/uniol-fonts
FEDORA-2022-4d96088a85 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-4d96088a85
FEDORA-2022-76ec126c4f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-76ec126c4f
FEDORA-2022-4d96088a85 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-2022-4d96088a85 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-4d96088a85 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2022-76ec126c4f has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-76ec126c4f \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-76ec126c4f See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2022-76ec126c4f has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2022-4d96088a85 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.