Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/linenoise/linenoise.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/linenoise/linenoise-0-1.git7946e2c.fc17.src.rpm Description: Linenoise is a replacement for the readline line-editing library with the goal of being smaller. Fedora Account System Username: dcallagh
Iguess the remaining issue are easy to fix, you need to send patches upstream, and ask for a license. Not sure if upstream will comply, but since that's not blocking, I approve the package. Package Review ============== Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ==== Issues ==== - patches do not have a link to upstream bugtracker - no license shipped by upstream, should be contacted ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. 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]: %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 requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [-]: 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 %doc. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/misc/checkout/git/FedoraReview/892988-linenoise/licensecheck.txt [-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (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]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [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 [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). ===== 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. [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [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]: 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]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: linenoise-0-1.git7946e2c.fc18.x86_64.rpm linenoise-devel-0-1.git7946e2c.fc18.x86_64.rpm linenoise.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) readline -> breadline, deadline, headline linenoise.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US readline -> breadline, deadline, headline linenoise-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint linenoise linenoise-devel linenoise.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) readline -> breadline, deadline, headline linenoise.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US readline -> breadline, deadline, headline linenoise-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- linenoise (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) linenoise-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): liblinenoise.so.0()(64bit) linenoise(x86-64) Provides -------- linenoise: liblinenoise.so.0()(64bit) linenoise linenoise(x86-64) linenoise-devel: linenoise-devel linenoise-devel(x86-64) MD5-sum check ------------- https://github.com/tadmarshall/linenoise/tarball/7946e2c/linenoise-7946e2c.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 26bae956eb179c834969150dd4c2a81170102256fa5e717c77597da2bf5c86e6 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 26bae956eb179c834969150dd4c2a81170102256fa5e717c77597da2bf5c86e6 Generated by fedora-review 0.2.0 (Unknown) last change: Unknown Buildroot used: fedora-18-x86_64 Command line :./try-fedora-review -b 892988
Thanks for the review, Michael. (In reply to comment #1) > Iguess the remaining issue are easy to fix, you need to send patches > upstream, and ask for a license. Not sure if upstream will comply, but since > that's not blocking, I approve the package. Build patches have been submitted here: https://github.com/tadmarshall/linenoise/pull/1 I've requested license clarifications from the authors by e-mail directly. I will update the spec with the results before committing it.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: linenoise Short Description: Minimal replacement for readline Owners: dcallagh Branches: el6 f17 f18 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
(In reply to comment #2) > I've requested license clarifications from the authors by e-mail directly. I > will update the spec with the results before committing it. License clarifications added here: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/linenoise.git/commit/?id=a295c350a097c2ee347447138eb5202ca33c46dd
Built in rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=380149
please also build this package on F18
(In reply to comment #7) > please also build this package on F18 Sure thing.
linenoise-0-3.git7946e2c.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/linenoise-0-3.git7946e2c.fc18
linenoise-0-3.git7946e2c.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.