Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
MPRIS-Webhook is a tool that generates webhooks from MPRIS-enabled media players. It was specifically designed with the Beetbrainz application in mind, allowing you to send beetbrainz enhanced scrobbles to Listenbrainz. spec: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/gbcox/dogfood/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09242349-golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook/golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook.spec srpm: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/gbcox/dogfood/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09242349-golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook/golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.0-1.src.rpm Reproducible: Always
spec: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/gbcox/dogfood/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09243809-golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook/golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook.spec srpm: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/gbcox/dogfood/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09243809-golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook/golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957.fc43.src.rpm corrected %autorelease macro (removed -n option)
I will take this review.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - 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 golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris- webhook See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_units The text above was generated by fedora-review. The wording is a bit confusing, to me at least, but I think it means that you need to add this to the spec file: %post %systemd_user_post %{project}.service %preun %systemd_user_preun %{project}.service %postun [One of the following, depending on your service] %systemd_user_postun_with_restart %{project}.service %systemd_user_postun_with_reload %{project}.service %systemd_user_postun %{project}.service ===== 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. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: 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. [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]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 805 bytes in 1 files. [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). [?]: 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]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. [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]: 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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957.fc43.x86_64.rpm golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957.fc43.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpkneqel80')] checks: 32, packages: 2 golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1.0-1 ['1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957.fc43', '1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957'] 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-debuginfo-1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957.fc43.x86_64.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpuakwn46k')] checks: 32, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 6 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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: 2 golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/bin/mpris-webhook /lib64/libresolv.so.2 golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1.0-1 ['1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957.fc43', '1.1.0-1.20250706gitaa10957'] 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 10 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s Source checksums ---------------- https://codeberg.org/gbcox/mpris-webhook/archive/aa1095748dc64de1b1d06b5dfb4c3a34bd7474b0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f2db696636a91a5bab07e9b670c43ba0f818190b6cba864e0c8ce18e03918639 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f2db696636a91a5bab07e9b670c43ba0f818190b6cba864e0c8ce18e03918639 Requires -------- golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libresolv.so.2()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook: golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2376545 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: C/C++, Python, R, PHP, Ocaml, SugarActivity, Perl, Ruby, Haskell, fonts, Java Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Hey Jerry, thanks for the quick turnaround. Regarding: - 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 golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris- webhook See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_units I did see that I tried added those statements and got the exact same message so took them out: Issues: ======= - 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 golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris- webhook See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_units I did also read the doc, and you are right it is confusing. I really don't see the point in those statements. This is systemd --user, so when this is installed as root via dnf, it can't really install the service anyway. It doesn't know what user is going to install. The service file is installed earlier by %install, so I'm not exactly sure what this is getting at. If you want me to add it in to pass the review, I certainly can, but it appears to be "not applicable" - or at the very least extremely confusing.
I wanted to make change so I just put the statements in there. They don't seem to hurt anything, but not sure what purpose they serve. Here are the new links. Thanks Jerry! spec: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/gbcox/dogfood/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09248336-golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook/golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook.spec srpm: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/gbcox/dogfood/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09248336-golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook/golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.5-1.20250708git04bd2b0.fc43.src.rpm
Yes, the guidelines seem to say that you must have those scriptlets in the spec file, so I think that change is the right thing to do, even if neither of us understands what they actually do. :-) This package is APPROVED.
Thanks Jerry!
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook
FEDORA-2025-a3cbfdf40a (golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.6-1.20250708gitb2636ce.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-a3cbfdf40a
FEDORA-2025-dadd96a670 (golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.6-1.20250708gitb2636ce.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-dadd96a670
FEDORA-2025-a3cbfdf40a (golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.6-1.20250708gitb2636ce.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-dadd96a670 has been pushed to the Fedora 42 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-dadd96a670 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-dadd96a670 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-dadd96a670 (golang-codeberg-gbcox-mpris-webhook-1.1.6-1.20250708gitb2636ce.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.