Spec URL: http://pjones.fedorapeople.org/pesign-test-app/pesign-test-app.spec SRPM URL: http://pjones.fedorapeople.org/pesign-test-app/pesign-test-app-0.3-1.src.rpm Description: This package contains a very simple UEFI application that effectively does nothing. The entire purpose of this is to provide a safe app to be signed, so that we don't have to build large applications in order to test that deployments of new pesign versions into build infrastructure have succeeded. Fedora Account System Username: PJones
rpmlint: fenchurch:~$ rpmlint /home/pjones/build/SRPMS/pesign-test-app-0.3-1.fc19.src.rpm pesign-test-app.src: W: invalid-url Source0: pesign-test-app-0.3.tar.bz2 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. This is due to not having tarballs on github; the package is built from the tarball generated from "make archive", with the tag being pushed upstream afterwards. fenchurch:~$ rpmlint /home/pjones/build/RPMS/x86_64/pesign-test-app-0.3-1.fc19.x86_64.rpm pesign-test-app.x86_64: E: no-binary 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. This error is because rpmlint doesn't grok UEFI binaries.
(Sorry, the src.rpm is at http://pjones.fedorapeople.org/pesign-test-app/pesign-test-app-0.3-1.fc19.src.rpm )
I'll take this
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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. [-]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. (Does not honor CFLAGS or LDFLAGS, but can't, since this isn't an ELF app) [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. (Does rm, but it's harmless so meh.) [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 [-]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [!]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. (What? Never heard of this guideline before. Whatever.) [!]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. (Package is legitimately ExclusiveArched to those that actually have EFI) [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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 %doc. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [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. [-]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. [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]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [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]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [!]: Uses parallel make. (Does not, but whatever, it's one source file, it wouldn't help) [!]: Buildroot is not present (Specified but harmless) [!]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) (As above) [-]: 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). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [!]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. (Doesn't, but meh.) [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [-]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Looks fine to me modulo the %{buildroot} stuff, which is harmless enough. Approved.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: pesign-test-app Short Description: Simple pesign test target Owners: pjones Branches: f19 InitialCC: pjones
Git done (by process-git-requests).
hyoscyamine:~% koji -q latest-pkg f21 pesign-test-app pesign-test-app-0.4-9.fc21 f21 ausil