Spec URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/localsearch.spec SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/localsearch-3.7.3-1.fc41.src.rpm Description: This is a renaming for the package tracker-miners which is being renamed as localsearch Fedora Account System Username: nmontero
There seems to be some problem with the following file. SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/localsearch-3.7.3-2.fc41.src.rpm Fetching it results in a 404 Not Found error. Please make sure the URL is correct and publicly available. --- 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.
As a minimum, the packages inside the spec file should be renamed. Also, the automated review comments should be resolved (you can even run fedora-review locally to get more detailed review comments).
You have not updated the packaging in a way that it builds, so please do that as a minimum before asking for review.
Spec URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/localsearch.spec SRPM URL: https://nmontero.fedorapeople.org/localsearch-3.8~rc-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: This is a renaming for the package tracker-miners which is being renamed as localsearch Fedora Account System Username: nmontero
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8222375 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2297297-localsearch/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08222375-localsearch/builder-live.log.gz Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide. - If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field --- 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.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8223016 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2297297-localsearch/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08223016-localsearch/builder-live.log.gz Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide. - If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field --- 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.
I ran a scratch build against the side tag containing localsearch, and it build fine on all architectures: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125559617 The spec looks good, you just need to check whether any of the libtracker* found in comments and private library exclusions is still valid, and adjust those accordingly.
Created attachment 2056205 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8223016 to 8225674
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8225674 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2297297-localsearch/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08225674-localsearch/builder-live.log.gz Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide. - If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field --- 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.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. - systemd_user_post is invoked in %post and systemd_user_preun in %preun for Systemd user units service files. Note: Systemd user unit service file(s) in localsearch See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_units The desktiop file install seems spurious, given that the location is for autostarting. As for the systemd user units, they seem correct. More important is the dbus directory ownership, which should be fixed before completing review. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [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. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License, Version 2 and/or GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later [obsolete FSF postal address (Temple Place)]", "MIT License", "GNU Library General Public License v2 or later", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later and/or GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later". 438 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/david/checkout/rpms/localsearch.new/review- localsearch/licensecheck.txt [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/dbus-1, /usr/share/dbus-1/services, /usr/share/dbus-1/interfaces [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. [x]: 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. [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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 310203 bytes in 3 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 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [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]: No %config files under /usr. [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. [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. [?]: 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. [?]: 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]: 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]: 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 2570240 bytes in /usr/share [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: localsearch-3.8~rc-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm localsearch-3.8~rc-1.fc42.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/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/tmp7vatln2n')] checks: 32, packages: 2 localsearch.src: E: spelling-error ('Tinysparql', '%description -l en_US Tinysparql -> Transparency') localsearch.src: E: spelling-error ('tinysparql', '%description -l en_US tinysparql -> transparency') localsearch.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('Tinysparql', '%description -l en_US Tinysparql -> Transparency') localsearch.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('tinysparql', '%description -l en_US tinysparql -> transparency') localsearch.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary localsearch localsearch.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary Localsearch localsearch.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary Localsearch localsearch.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.8.rc-1 ['3.8~rc-1.fc42', '3.8~rc-1'] 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 4 warnings, 7 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 1.8 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: there is no installed rpm "localsearch". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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: 1 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Unversioned so-files -------------------- localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-abw.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-bmp.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-desktop.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-disc-generic.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-dummy.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-epub.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-gif.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-gstreamer.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-html.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-icon.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-iso.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-jpeg.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-mp3.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-msoffice-xml.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-msoffice.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-oasis.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-pdf.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-playlist.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-png.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-ps.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-raw.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-text.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-tiff.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/extract-modules/libextract-xps.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/libtracker-extract.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/writeback-modules/libwriteback-gstreamer.so localsearch: /usr/lib64/localsearch-3.0/writeback-modules/libwriteback-xmp.so Source checksums ---------------- https://download.gnome.org/sources/localsearch/3.8/localsearch-3.8.rc.tar.xz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d859df53024f6a26db888d92cccf12b973e1a2cf1d106dd737b253650a4306a4 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d859df53024f6a26db888d92cccf12b973e1a2cf1d106dd737b253650a4306a4 Requires -------- localsearch (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/sh config(localsearch) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcue.so.2()(64bit) libexempi.so.8()(64bit) libexif.so.12()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libgexiv2.so.2()(64bit) libgif.so.7()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgsf-1.so.114()(64bit) libgstpbutils-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgstreamer-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgsttag-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgudev-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgxps.so.2()(64bit) libicui18n.so.74()(64bit) libiptcdata.so.0()(64bit) libjpeg.so.62()(64bit) libjpeg.so.62(LIBJPEG_6.2)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libosinfo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libosinfo-1.0.so.0(LIBOSINFO_0.0.1)(64bit) libosinfo-1.0.so.0(LIBOSINFO_0.0.3)(64bit) libosinfo-1.0.so.0(LIBOSINFO_0.2.3)(64bit) libosinfo-1.0.so.0(LIBOSINFO_0.2.9)(64bit) libpng16.so.16()(64bit) libpng16.so.16(PNG16_0)(64bit) libpoppler-glib.so.8()(64bit) libseccomp.so.2()(64bit) libtiff.so.6()(64bit) libtiff.so.6(LIBTIFF_4.0)(64bit) libtiff.so.6(LIBTIFF_4.1)(64bit) libtinysparql-3.0.so.0()(64bit) libtotem-plparser.so.18()(64bit) libtotem-plparser.so.18(LIBTOTEM_PL_PARSER_MINI_1.0)(64bit) libupower-glib.so.3()(64bit) libxml2.so.2()(64bit) libxml2.so.2(LIBXML2_2.4.30)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) tinysparql(x86-64) Provides -------- localsearch: config(localsearch) localsearch localsearch(x86-64) tracker-miners tracker-miners(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n localsearch --prebuilt Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Haskell, R, Java, SugarActivity, fonts, PHP, Perl, Ocaml, Python Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Created attachment 2057453 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8225674 to 8250481
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8250481 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2297297-localsearch/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08250481-localsearch/builder-live.log.gz Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide. - If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field --- 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/localsearch