Spec URL: https://xhorak.fedorapeople.org/gweather-locations.spec SRPM URL: https://xhorak.fedorapeople.org/gweather-locations-2025.1-1.fc44.src.rpm Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=141433515 Description: The GWeather locations database contains a list of locations used by GNOME components through the GWeather library. It's newly needed by the libgweather package. Fedora Account System Username: xhorak
Taking this review.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10047323 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2432007-gweather-locations/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10047323-gweather-locations/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - Not a valid SPDX expression 'GNU General Public License version 2.0'. Read more: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SPDX_Licenses_Phase_1 Please know that there can be false-positives. --- 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.
[fedora-review-service-build]
Created attachment 2123250 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 10047323 to 10047372
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10047372 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2432007-gweather-locations/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10047372-gweather-locations/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.
I'll steal this from Neal, because he is traveling this week.
I see four things to fix: - devel subpackage needs to require the main package: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} - Need to own %dir %{_libdir}/gweather-locations - Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. - Need to shorten description to placate rpmlint E: description-line-too-long Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [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. [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. Note: Devel subpackage does not Requires: the main package [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/gweather-locations [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/gweather-locations [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. [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]: 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. [!]: Package does not generate any conflict. Note: will conflict with older libgweather, which is expected [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. -devel subpackage should Requires the main package [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. [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]: 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 1158 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [ ]: 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in gweather-locations-devel [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. Note: upstream seems to have messed up. The tarball version number does not match the git tag. [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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. [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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. ===== 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 22446080 bytes in /usr/share gweather-locations-2025.1-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm:22435840 See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_Guidelines [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. Rpmlint ------- Checking: gweather-locations-2025.1-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm gweather-locations-devel-2025.1-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm gweather-locations-2025.1-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp8tjzbdbb')] checks: 32, packages: 3 gweather-locations.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib gweather-locations-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation gweather-locations.spec: W: no-%check-section gweather-locations.src: E: description-line-too-long The GWeather locations database contains a list of locations used by GNOME components through the GWeather library. gweather-locations.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long The GWeather locations database contains a list of locations used by GNOME components through the GWeather library. 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings, 11 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.9 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: there is no installed rpm "gweather-locations". (none): E: there is no installed rpm "gweather-locations-devel". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 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 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://download.gnome.org/sources/gweather-locations/2025/gweather-locations-2025.1.tar.xz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 5609ee04cf6ac4cc7721f3241bd8d69ffebf0f1b60210fadd88c869a4b884d87 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5609ee04cf6ac4cc7721f3241bd8d69ffebf0f1b60210fadd88c869a4b884d87 Requires -------- gweather-locations (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gweather-locations-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config Provides -------- gweather-locations: gweather-locations gweather-locations(x86-64) gweather-locations-devel: gweather-locations-devel gweather-locations-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(gweather-locations) Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name gweather-locations --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Java, Perl, PHP, Haskell, Ocaml, R, SugarActivity, Python, fonts, C/C++ Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Thanks for stepping in Michael. I presume that the package cannot be noarch, since the msgfmt used to generate binary file set the endlessness to the platform. I've moved the Location.xml and .dtd into the noarch subpackage. I'm not sure if I need to add dependency on the main package as you've mentioned for the -devel. Also the /usr/share/locale, if that should also be part of the noarch subpackage.
(In reply to Jan Horak from comment #8) > I'm not sure if I need to add dependency on the main package as you've > mentioned for the -devel. For -common you surely need the opposite: the main package should depend on the -common subpackage, right? > Also the /usr/share/locale, if that should also be > part of the noarch subpackage. Eh, I'm not sure, but I'd say it's simpler to leave it as-is. We don't need to go out of the way to force everything possible into the noarch package. P.S. You'll remove the - from the end of the file before uploading the package, right?
Created attachment 2127561 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 10047372 to 10082128
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10082128 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2432007-gweather-locations/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10082128-gweather-locations/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.
Still need to fix: gweather-locations.src: E: description-line-too-long The GWeather locations database contains a list of locations used by GWeather library gweather-locations.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long The GWeather locations database contains a list of locations used by GWeather library Anyway, I'll approve this now.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gweather-locations