Fedora Merge Review: xalan-j2 http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/xalan-j2/ Initial Owner: vivekl
I'll do merge review, akurtakov will do the fixing
Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated === REQUIRED ITEMS === [!] Rpmlint output: xalan-j2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlet -> servile, serviette, servility xalan-j2.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML xalan-j2.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-2.7.1/NOTICE.txt xalan-j2.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-2.7.1/LICENSE.txt xalan-j2.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/java/jaxp_transform_impl.jar /etc/alternatives xalan-j2.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-2.7.1/KEYS xalan-j2.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/xalan-j2.jar xalan-j2-demo.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML xalan-j2-demo.noarch: W: no-documentation xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runXalan.sh 0644L /bin/sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runXalan.sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runDerby.sh 0644L /bin/sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runDerby.sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runExtConnection.sh 0644L /bin/sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runExtConnection.sh xalan-j2-javadoc.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/xsltc/README.xsltc xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/xsltc/README.xslt xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/resources/script.js xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/xsltc/resources/script.js xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/apidocs /usr/share/javadoc/xalan-j2 xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stylesheets -> style sheets, style-sheets, stylishness xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US translets -> trans lets, trans-lets, translates xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: no-documentation xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/xsltc.jar 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 21 warnings. You know what to do :-) Except maybe those examples...if they run fine in-place perhaps they could be made +x, otherwise just leave them -x [x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1]. [x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format %{name}.spec. [x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2]. [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms. [!] Buildroot definition is not present [x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines[3,4]. [!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: ASL 1.1 and ASL 2.0 and W3C If I understand LICENSE.txt correctly, parts of xalan are generic BSD license (JLex, CUP) [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 %doc. [!] All independent sub-packages have license of their own xsltc, manual and javadoc subpackages don't have LICENSE.txt and don't require base package [x] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. MD5SUM this package : fc805051f0fe505c7a4b1b5c8db9b9e3 [!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5]. Missing zip BR [x] Package must own all directories that it creates. [x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. xsltc subpackage doesn't require jpackage utils, but its other deps should pull it in so no problem [x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x] Permissions on files are set properly. [!] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore) Remove clean and rm -rf [x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT mixing) [x] Package contains code, or permissable content. [x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage [x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks) [x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils [x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils [x] Package uses %global not %define [-] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...) [!] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be removed prior to building These lines are a problem: # FIXME who knows where the sources are? xalan-j1 ? mv tools/xalan2jdoc.jar.no tools/xalan2jdoc.jar mv tools/xalan2jtaglet.jar.no tools/xalan2jtaglet.jar Build of xalan-j2 uses binary files that we don't have sources for. If you can't find sources I guess we could ask for an exception (we need these files just to build, they are not installed). [x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details) [-] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant [-] pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom file (use "JPP." and "JPP-" correctly) Perhaps maven support could be added? === Maven === [-] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms [-] If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a comment [-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven2.jpp.depmap.file=*" explain why it's needed in a comment [-] Package uses %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun [-] Packages have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage-utils (for %update_maven_depmap macro) === Other suggestions === [x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac) [x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary [x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible) [x] Latest version is packaged. [!] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. (missing zip in BR) Tested on: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 === Issues === 1. rpmlint problems (groups, EOLs, classpaths-in-manifests etc) 2. buildroot, clean section and rm -rf buildroot 3. license review and inclusion in sub-packages 4. zip BR 5. use of bundled libs for building 6. unused patches 7. stale commented snippets 8. I'd prefer if jars in %prep were -delete(ed) instead of moved
Mass reassigning all merge reviews to their component. For more details, see this FESCO ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1269 If you don't know what merge reviews are about, please see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Merge_Reviews How to handle this bug is left to the discretion of the package maintainer.
Michael, could you please review this package?
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Bundled jars used for generating documentation - Wrong end-of-line encodings ===== 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)". 26 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/msimacek/pkgs/xalan-j2/review-xalan-j2/licensecheck.txt [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. [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: 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. [x]: 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. Note: Test run failed [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Test run failed [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Note: Test run failed [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]: 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 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. Java: [!]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Note: Test run failed [x]: Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc subpackage [x]: Javadoc subpackages should not have Requires: jpackage-utils [x]: Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlink) Maven: [x]: POM files have correct Maven mapping Note: Some add_maven_depmap calls found. Please check if they are correct or update to latest guidelines [x]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when building with ant [x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used [x]: Packages DO NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on jpackage- utils for %update_maven_depmap macro [x]: Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun [x]: Packages use %{_mavenpomdir} instead of %{_datadir}/maven2/poms ===== 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in xalan-j2-xsltc , xalan-j2-manual , xalan-j2-javadoc , xalan-j2-demo [?]: Package functions as described. [-]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [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. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Java: [ ]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) [x]: Packages are noarch unless they use JNI ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Test run failed [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: xalan-j2-2.7.1-24.fc22.noarch.rpm xalan-j2-xsltc-2.7.1-24.fc22.noarch.rpm xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1-24.fc22.noarch.rpm xalan-j2-javadoc-2.7.1-24.fc22.noarch.rpm xalan-j2-demo-2.7.1-24.fc22.noarch.rpm xalan-j2-2.7.1-24.fc22.src.rpm xalan-j2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlet -> settler xalan-j2.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/java/jaxp_transform_impl.jar /etc/alternatives xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stylesheets -> style sheets, style-sheets, dustsheets xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US translets -> trans lets, trans-lets, translates xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: no-documentation xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual/xsltc/README.xslt xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual/xsltc/resources/script.js xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual/xsltc/README.xsltc xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual/apidocs /usr/share/javadoc/xalan-j2 xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual/resources/script.js xalan-j2-demo.noarch: W: no-documentation xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runXalan.sh 0644L /bin/sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runXalan.sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runDerby.sh 0644L /bin/sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runDerby.sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runExtConnection.sh 0644L /bin/sh xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runExtConnection.sh xalan-j2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlet -> settler xalan-j2.src:57: W: unversioned-explicit-provides jaxp_transform_impl 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 13 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Requires -------- xalan-j2-xsltc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): bcel java-headless java_cup jpackage-utils regexp xerces-j2 xalan-j2-manual (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): xalan-j2 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh chkconfig java-headless jpackage-utils osgi(org.apache.xerces) xerces-j2 xalan-j2-demo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): tomcat-servlet-3.0-api xalan-j2 xalan-j2-javadoc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jpackage-utils Provides -------- xalan-j2-xsltc: mvn(xalan:xsltc) mvn(xalan:xsltc:pom:) xalan-j2-xsltc xalan-j2-manual: xalan-j2-manual xalan-j2: jaxp_transform_impl mvn(xalan:serializer) mvn(xalan:serializer:pom:) mvn(xalan:xalan) mvn(xalan:xalan:pom:) osgi(org.apache.xalan) osgi(org.apache.xml.serializer) xalan-j2 xalan-j2-demo: xalan-j2-demo xalan-j2-javadoc: xalan-j2-javadoc Source checksums ---------------- http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/xalan/xalan/2.7.1/xalan-2.7.1.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : db8e8871eb084530273bae07e2f7caa4af370f8cf16c2a598087ae3c3ac55429 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : db8e8871eb084530273bae07e2f7caa4af370f8cf16c2a598087ae3c3ac55429 http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/xalan/serializer/2.7.1/serializer-2.7.1.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b0f3c4bcf2604c903eb45eac9fb0c4de50f3895059cec4c6ac88eae15613f081 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b0f3c4bcf2604c903eb45eac9fb0c4de50f3895059cec4c6ac88eae15613f081 http://archive.apache.org/dist/xml/xalan-j/xalan-j_2_7_1-src.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : fa52aa629bb882335d45d67401d270c3f21b5131aaea005ac0d4590f2ce8b043 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : fa52aa629bb882335d45d67401d270c3f21b5131aaea005ac0d4590f2ce8b043 Using local file /home/msimacek/pkgs/xalan-j2/xalan-j2-serializer-MANIFEST.MF as upstream file:///home/msimacek/pkgs/xalan-j2/xalan-j2-serializer-MANIFEST.MF : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d475357c30699ef5909bf406f26f0d050ced72b0b0b534213795c8170de64c2a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d475357c30699ef5909bf406f26f0d050ced72b0b0b534213795c8170de64c2a Using local file /home/msimacek/pkgs/xalan-j2/xsltc-2.7.1.pom as upstream file:///home/msimacek/pkgs/xalan-j2/xsltc-2.7.1.pom : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a16b1be93e52bd200e9cd88fb31823084531098e1676297e73a07b6d4740568b CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a16b1be93e52bd200e9cd88fb31823084531098e1676297e73a07b6d4740568b Using local file /home/msimacek/pkgs/xalan-j2/xalan-j2-MANIFEST.MF as upstream file:///home/msimacek/pkgs/xalan-j2/xalan-j2-MANIFEST.MF : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : bdc9ca6aaa60b63f2357ab34de4d4c39a7f847b5502e146e21f440c1bdb7782f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : bdc9ca6aaa60b63f2357ab34de4d4c39a7f847b5502e146e21f440c1bdb7782f Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n xalan-j2 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Java Disabled plugins: C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG I'll fix those issues myself as the package's comaintainer.