Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://iucar.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/wavemon.spec SRPM URL: https://iucar.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/wavemon-0.9.7-1.fc45.src.rpm Description: wavemon is a wireless device monitoring application that allows you to watch all important information like device configuration, encryption, and power management parameters and network information at once. Adaptive level bargraphs for link quality, signal/noise strength and signal-to-noise ratio. The customizeable "level alarm" feature that notices the user of changes in signal level strength audibly and/or visually. wavemon is able to list of access points in range and shows full-screen level histogram displaying signal/noise levels and SNR. Fedora Account System Username: iucar
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10582372 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2486945-wavemon/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10582372-wavemon/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/wavemon Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names 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.
Will fix the spelling errors in the description.
Here are the issues that I found: 1. iw_nl80211.h and iw_nl80211.c seem to be under ISC license and you don't mention it. 2. How do you know it's GPL-3.0-only and not GPL-3.0-or-later? I created an issue at https://github.com/uoaerg/wavemon/issues/143 and it's worth linking it in your spec unless resolved. 3. Could you convert BuildRequires: ncurses-devel BuildRequires: libcap-devel BuildRequires: libnl3-devel according to https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/PkgConfigBuildRequires/ ? 4. I believe it's about libcap-devel and not libpcap-devel requirement. The first one gives "checking for cap_get_flag in -lcap... yes" and the second one "checking for cap_get_flag in -lcap... no". 5. Could you modify # Delete wrong placed doc files to something like # Delete wrong placed doc files (LICENSE and README.md) ? The first impression is like why don't you move them to the right place instead of deleting them. Could you review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2493698 in return? Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not use a name that already exists. Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/wavemon See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [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]: 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later", "FSF Unlimited License (with License Retention) and/or GNU General Public License v2.0 or later [generated file]", "FSF Unlimited License [generated file]", "ISC License", "X11 License [generated file]". 14 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/wavemon/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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. [!]: 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. [!]: 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 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 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 2114 bytes in 1 files. [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. [-]: %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: [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. [x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Rpmlint ------- Checking: wavemon-0.9.7-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm wavemon-0.9.7-1.fc45.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/tmp1jucnk_x')] checks: 32, packages: 2 wavemon.src: E: spelling-error ('Ncurses', 'Summary(en_US) Ncurses -> Curses, N curses, Nurses') wavemon.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('Ncurses', 'Summary(en_US) Ncurses -> Curses, N curses, Nurses') wavemon.spec: W: specfile-warning sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8): No such file or directory wavemon.spec: W: no-%check-section 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings, 7 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.2 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: wavemon-debuginfo-0.9.7-1.fc45.x86_64.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/tmp9upn3u5g')] checks: 32, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: there is no installed rpm "wavemon". (none): E: there is no installed rpm "wavemon-debuginfo". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.9.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.15/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://github.com/uoaerg/wavemon/archive/v0.9.7/wavemon-0.9.7.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 768d7c580fcc592efcacac924dcfd2ebe131608f5c8ac67d36e35731e1ac683a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 768d7c580fcc592efcacac924dcfd2ebe131608f5c8ac67d36e35731e1ac683a Requires -------- wavemon (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libncursesw.so.6()(64bit) libnl-3.so.200()(64bit) libnl-3.so.200(libnl_3)(64bit) libnl-cli-3.so.200()(64bit) libnl-cli-3.so.200(libnl_3)(64bit) libnl-genl-3.so.200()(64bit) libnl-genl-3.so.200(libnl_3)(64bit) libnl-route-3.so.200()(64bit) libnl-route-3.so.200(libnl_3)(64bit) libtinfo.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- wavemon: wavemon wavemon(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name wavemon --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: fonts, R, Python, Haskell, Perl, Java, PHP, SugarActivity, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Spec URL: https://iucar.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/wavemon.spec SRPM URL: https://iucar.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/wavemon-0.9.7-1.fc45.src.rpm Thanks, modifications above. Comments: (In reply to wojnilowicz from comment #3) > Here are the issues that I found: > 1. iw_nl80211.h and iw_nl80211.c seem to be under ISC license and you don't > mention it. Done. > 2. How do you know it's GPL-3.0-only and not GPL-3.0-or-later? I created an > issue at https://github.com/uoaerg/wavemon/issues/143 and it's worth linking > it in your spec unless resolved. Thanks, done. > 3. Could you convert > BuildRequires: ncurses-devel > BuildRequires: libcap-devel > BuildRequires: libnl3-devel > according to > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > PkgConfigBuildRequires/ ? This is not mandatory, but ok. > 4. I believe it's about libcap-devel and not libpcap-devel requirement. The > first one gives "checking for cap_get_flag in -lcap... yes" and the second > one "checking for cap_get_flag in -lcap... no". It is indeed libcap instead of libpcap. Modified now. Since it is an unretirement and the package was reported as working fine before, I assumed dependencies were ok. Good catch. > 5. Could you modify > # Delete wrong placed doc files > to something like > # Delete wrong placed doc files (LICENSE and README.md) > ? Done. > The first impression is like why don't you move them to the right place > instead of deleting them. The corresponding macros in %files know where to put them without me having to enter the path manually, so fewer chances of messing up. > Could you review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2493698 in > return? Will do.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10660756 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2486945-wavemon/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10660756-wavemon/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/wavemon Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names 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.
(In reply to Iñaki Ucar from comment #4) > Spec URL: https://iucar.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/wavemon.spec > SRPM URL: https://iucar.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/wavemon-0.9.7-1.fc45.src.rpm > > Thanks, modifications above. Comments: > > (In reply to wojnilowicz from comment #3) > > Here are the issues that I found: > > 1. iw_nl80211.h and iw_nl80211.c seem to be under ISC license and you don't > > mention it. > > Done. Sorry. I made an error. I believe it should be # ISC: nl80211.h and not # ISC: iw_nl80211.* Could you correct this? Otherwise everything LGTM.
Ok, can we proceed then?
Yes. Just please correct this ISC thing before uploading. Thanks.
Sure, thanks. Moving to POST then.