Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/valeronoi/valeronoi.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/valeronoi/valeronoi-0.2.1-1.fc40.src.rpm Description: Valeronoi (Valetudo + Voronoi) is a companion for Valetudo for generating WiFi signal strength maps. It visualizes them using a Voronoi diagram. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=110921124
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6823503 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2255995-valeronoi/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06823503-valeronoi/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
You need to Require: hicolor-icon-theme - see the review template on unowned directories (You could also %dir each of them but that's a long list)
Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/valeronoi/valeronoi.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/valeronoi/valeronoi-0.2.1-1.fc40.src.rpm Changelog: - add Requires: hicolor-icon-theme
Created attachment 2007291 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 6823503 to 6865311
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6865311 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2255995-valeronoi/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06865311-valeronoi/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
Turns out there are some additional icon sizes that's not even part of hicolor-icon-theme - add those manually as %dir and this is good to go Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [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]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/icons/hicolor/180x180/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/1024x1024, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/180x180, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/1024x1024/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/144x144/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/144x144 [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/1024x1024/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/180x180/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/144x144/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/144x144, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/180x180, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/1024x1024 [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 11342 bytes in 1 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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: [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). [?]: 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]: 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]: 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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: valeronoi-0.2.1-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm valeronoi-debuginfo-0.2.1-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm valeronoi-debugsource-0.2.1-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm valeronoi-0.2.1-1.fc40.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpnzall46a')] checks: 31, packages: 4 valeronoi.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary valeronoi 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: valeronoi-debuginfo-0.2.1-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp_lrb4by6')] checks: 31, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: there is no installed rpm "valeronoi-debugsource". (none): E: there is no installed rpm "valeronoi-debuginfo". (none): E: there is no installed rpm "valeronoi". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 3 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/ccoors/Valeronoi/archive/v0.2.1/Valeronoi-0.2.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2337d2b5db06f7de6f86e5ff30f2d54fd9e97ea67eb78eedce08d64eae4c9389 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2337d2b5db06f7de6f86e5ff30f2d54fd9e97ea67eb78eedce08d64eae4c9389 Requires -------- valeronoi (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): hicolor-icon-theme libQt6Core.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Core.so.6(Qt_6.6)(64bit) libQt6Gui.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Gui.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Network.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Network.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6OpenGLWidgets.so.6()(64bit) libQt6OpenGLWidgets.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Svg.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Svg.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libQt6Widgets.so.6()(64bit) libQt6Widgets.so.6(Qt_6)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libgmp.so.10()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) valeronoi-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): valeronoi-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- valeronoi: application() application(valeronoi.desktop) metainfo() metainfo(valeronoi.metainfo.xml) valeronoi valeronoi(x86-64) valeronoi-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) valeronoi-debuginfo valeronoi-debuginfo(x86-64) valeronoi-debugsource: valeronoi-debugsource valeronoi-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name valeronoi --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, C/C++ Disabled plugins: PHP, SugarActivity, Python, fonts, R, Haskell, Java, Perl, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/valeronoi/valeronoi.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/valeronoi/valeronoi-0.2.1-1.fc40.src.rpm Changelog: - create unowned directories
Created attachment 2007446 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 6865311 to 6867931
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6867931 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2255995-valeronoi/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06867931-valeronoi/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/valeronoi
FEDORA-2024-52efe2309d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-52efe2309d
FEDORA-2024-52efe2309d has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2024-db05a62077 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-db05a62077
FEDORA-2024-8944d30f91 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8944d30f91
FEDORA-2024-db05a62077 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-db05a62077 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-db05a62077 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2024-8944d30f91 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-8944d30f91 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8944d30f91 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2024-db05a62077 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2024-8944d30f91 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.