Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/wmwave.spec SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/wmwave-0.4-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: wmwave is a dockapp for Windowmaker to display statistical information about a current wireless Ethernet connection. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3176815
The "Group" tag was missing. New files: Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/wmwave.spec SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/wmwave-0.4-2.fc15.src.rpm
Informal review (working with potential sponsor) [build@fedora15 result]$ rpmlint *.rpm wmwave.i686: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found de wmwave.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapp -> dock app, dock-app, paddock wmwave.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/man/man1/wmwave.1.gz wmwave.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapp -> dock app, dock-app, paddock 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. --- (I will post a full detailed review shorty) Damian
Detailed informal review key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work [] unsure [learning] --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. req. final check with potential sponsor [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - GPLv2 according to script header [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. - Spec file includes German Summary(de): and %description -l de [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. md5sum wmwave-0-4.tgz* 8728507eccb01a9749336f53ac4182c5 wmwave-0-4.tgz 8728507eccb01a9749336f53ac4182c5 wmwave-0-4.tgz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. is chmod -x %{name}.1 strictly necessary? [+] MUST: Packages must not provide RPM dependency information when that information is not global in nature, or are otherwise handled. [.] MUST: When filtering automatically generated RPM dependency information, the filtering system implemented by Fedora must be used. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. EPEL <= 5 only: [+] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field. [x] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}. [x] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. [.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' [+] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [+] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.
I'm going to sponsor Damian, thus taking over the review. (In reply to comment #3) > [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. > - GPLv2 according to script header As neither the source file headers nor the documentation mention the intended GPL version, the package is licensed under GPL+. Also see the comment on "GPL+" at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#SoftwareLicenses > [] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. > - Spec file includes German Summary(de): and %description -l de That's fine. Additional translations of Summary and %description are always welcome. > [] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. > is chmod -x %{name}.1 strictly necessary? Yes. Mario, please clear the exec bits of the manpage: - drop chmod -x %{name}.1 from %install - add option -m 644 to the last install statement I also suggest to move the "find" statement from %build to %prep. > [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. It's recommended to either use $RPM_OPT_FLAGS/$RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{optflags}/%{buildroot} and not to mix styles (variables vs. macros). Currently, %{optflags} are used in the %build section and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %install. > EPEL <= 5 only: > [+] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field. There's no BuildRoot field in the spec. ;) But that's OK as Mario probably don't want to build for EPEL. > [] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. It's good practice to keep the timestamps of files that go from the source archive into the package, e.g. manpages, media files, ... The manpage is properly installed with "install -p", so this is OK. > [] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. Just try to install and to run the built binary and verify if it works. It shouldn't crash at least. It seems to work as expected. So far for now. I'm going to do the formal review tomorrow.
Due to some crashes, I've tried to fix it by using a patch from the Debian folks (http://patch-tracker.debian.org/patch/misc/view/wmwave/0.4-9/wmwave.c). This adds a new BR for wireless-tools-devel, and I had to patch the Makefile accordingly. Now it works fine, no crashes anymore. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3251590 New files: Spec URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/wmwave.spec SRPM URL: http://mariobl.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/wmwave-0.4-3.fc15.src.rpm As described in wmwave.c, the code is mainly derived from wmsysmon and wmtop. At least, wmtop is released under GPLv2, see my package (bug #682353). Is it really correct here to drop the GPL version? Should't we respect the original license?
(In reply to comment #5) > As described in wmwave.c, the code is mainly derived from wmsysmon and wmtop. > At least, wmtop is released under GPLv2, see my package (bug #682353). Is it > really correct here to drop the GPL version? Should't we respect the original > license? a) No and b) Yes. In this case GPLv2+ is correct. Unfortunately, the author of wmwave didn't add a proper notice about the license of the code he derived from. If wmtop and wmsysmon are provided under GPLv2+, then wmwave is at least GPLv2 too.
OK, the license is now GPLv2+ again. Release number has not been bumped, the file links are still valid.
The package currently doesn't build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3252006 This is because library libiw is not linked. Add -liw to variable LIBS (line 11) in the Makefile to fix this. Alternatively, you can also add the definition of LIBS to the make statement in %build.
Which srpm you have used? The latest one from comment #5 includes a patch for the Makefile, which adds -liw to the LIBS variable. Koji succeeded for me: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3252088
I've downloaded wmwave-0.4-3.fc15.src.rpm several times today and have three different versions of release 3 now. ;) Anyway, the latest one builds properly and is ready for check-in. Just fix the mixed tab/space issue in line 18. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-15-i386/result/*.rpm wmwave.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapp -> dock app, dock-app, paddock wmwave.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dockapp -> dock app, dock-app, paddock wmwave.src:18: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 18) 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license. - GPLv2+ (see previous comments) [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [+] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source. $ md5sum wmwave-0-4.tgz* 8728507eccb01a9749336f53ac4182c5 wmwave-0-4.tgz 8728507eccb01a9749336f53ac4182c5 wmwave-0-4.tgz.1 [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, ... [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires. [+] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [.] MUST: If a package installs files below %{_datadir}/icons, the icon cache must be updated. [.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ... [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files. [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. [+] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application. [.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), ... [.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. EPEL <= 5 only: [X] MUST: The spec file must contain a valid BuildRoot field. [X] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}. [X] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}. [.] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [+] SHOULD: Timestamps of files should be preserved. [+] SHOULD: Patch files should be prefixed with %{name}- [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin ... [+] SHOULD: Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. ---------------- Package APPROVED ----------------
Thanks for your review! I will fix the mixed-space-and-tabes issue before committing to VCS.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: wmwave Short Description: Statistics about a current wireless Ethernet connection Owners: mariobl Branches: f15 f16
Git done (by process-git-requests).
wmwave-0.4-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wmwave-0.4-3.fc16
wmwave-0.4-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wmwave-0.4-3.fc15
wmwave-0.4-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.
wmwave-0.4-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
wmwave-0.4-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.