Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1281876
Summary: | Review Request: enki - Extensible text editor for programmers | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Raphael Groner <projects.rg> | ||||
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Christian Dersch <lupinix.fedora> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||
Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | anto.trande, i, kevin, tchollingsworth, yajo.sk8 | ||||
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature, Reopened | ||||
Target Release: | --- | Flags: | lupinix.fedora:
fedora-review+
|
||||
Hardware: | All | ||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Enhancement | |||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
Clone Of: | 984560 | Environment: | |||||
Last Closed: | 2016-01-11 21:54:26 UTC | Type: | Bug | ||||
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
Embargoed: | |||||||
Bug Depends On: | 1273601 | ||||||
Bug Blocks: | 928937 | ||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Raphael Groner
2015-11-13 16:50:34 UTC
*** Bug 984560 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** raphgro's scratch build of enki-15.05.0-1.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11821962 raphgro's scratch build of enki-15.05.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11822227 SPEC: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/enki/enki.spec SRPM: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/enki/enki-15.05.0-1.fc23.src.rpm Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11822227 raphgro's scratch build of enki-15.05.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11822674 Taken and already reviewing :) Review done :) Solution: Not approved TODO: * License tag should be GPLv2+ and GPLv3+ * Please add licensing breakdown * Ask upstream about license of files with unknown license * Ask upstream to include a copy of GPLv3 too Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [?]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. ====> ask upstream about license of files with unknown license [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v3 or later) GPL (v3 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 359 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/review/1281876-enki/licensecheck.txt ====> License tag should be GPLv2+ and GPLv3+ [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. ====> Please add this, ask upstream about license of files with unknown license [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [-]: 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. [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]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in enki [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in enki [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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). [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]: 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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. ====> Ask upstream to include a copy of GPL3 too [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in enki-doc [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: 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 unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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: enki-15.05.0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-doc-15.05.0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-15.05.0-1.fc24.src.rpm enki.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary enki 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- enki.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary enki 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- enki-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): enki (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/python2 PyQt4 ctags hicolor-icon-theme pyparsing python(abi) python-docutils python-markdown python-tre python2 python2-qutepart Provides -------- enki-doc: enki-doc enki: application() application(enki.desktop) enki mimehandler(text/css) mimehandler(text/html) mimehandler(text/plain) mimehandler(text/x-adasrc) mimehandler(text/x-c++src) mimehandler(text/x-chdr) mimehandler(text/x-cmake) mimehandler(text/x-csharp) mimehandler(text/x-csrc) mimehandler(text/x-fortran) mimehandler(text/x-idl) mimehandler(text/x-java) mimehandler(text/x-lua) mimehandler(text/x-makefile) mimehandler(text/x-pascal) mimehandler(text/x-patch) mimehandler(text/x-python) mimehandler(text/x-readme) mimehandler(text/x-tcl) mimehandler(text/x-tex) mimehandler(text/x-texinfo) mimehandler(text/x-verilog) mimehandler(text/x-vhdl) mimehandler(text/xml) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/hlamer/enki/archive/v15.05.0.tar.gz#/enki-15.05.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 15d04e74cbff44768452fee562dab7bcff2da02edfa5617a37578a814f898076 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 15d04e74cbff44768452fee562dab7bcff2da02edfa5617a37578a814f898076 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1281876 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 Created attachment 1094220 [details]
Output of licensecheck
License clarification: https://github.com/hlamer/enki/issues/344 SPEC: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/enki/enki.spec SRPM: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/enki/enki-15.05.0-2.fc23.src.rpm Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11887946 * Tue Nov 17 2015 Raphael Groner <> - 15.05.0-2 - fix license breakdown - ignore useless distribution folders - use python macros to build and install - split plugins into subpackage raphgro's scratch build of enki-15.05.0-2.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11887946 Package itself is fine now :) I'll approve when upstream clarified GPLv2 vs GPLv3 stuff. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [?]: 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: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 343 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/review/1281876-enki/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [?]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. [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]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in enki [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in enki [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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). [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]: 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. ====> Done by Raphael, https://github.com/hlamer/enki/issues/344 [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in enki-doc [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. ====> Is a noarch package [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: 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 unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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: enki-15.05.0-2.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-plugins-15.05.0-2.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-doc-15.05.0-2.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-15.05.0-2.fc24.src.rpm enki.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary enki enki-plugins.noarch: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- enki-plugins.noarch: W: no-documentation enki.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary enki 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Requires -------- enki-plugins (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): enki python(abi) enki-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): enki (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/python2 PyQt4 ctags hicolor-icon-theme pyparsing python(abi) python-docutils python-markdown python-tre python2 python2-qutepart Provides -------- enki-plugins: enki-plugins enki-doc: enki-doc enki: application() application(enki.desktop) enki mimehandler(text/css) mimehandler(text/html) mimehandler(text/plain) mimehandler(text/x-adasrc) mimehandler(text/x-c++src) mimehandler(text/x-chdr) mimehandler(text/x-cmake) mimehandler(text/x-csharp) mimehandler(text/x-csrc) mimehandler(text/x-fortran) mimehandler(text/x-idl) mimehandler(text/x-java) mimehandler(text/x-lua) mimehandler(text/x-makefile) mimehandler(text/x-pascal) mimehandler(text/x-patch) mimehandler(text/x-python) mimehandler(text/x-readme) mimehandler(text/x-tcl) mimehandler(text/x-tex) mimehandler(text/x-texinfo) mimehandler(text/x-verilog) mimehandler(text/x-vhdl) mimehandler(text/xml) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/hlamer/enki/archive/v15.05.0.tar.gz#/enki-15.05.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 15d04e74cbff44768452fee562dab7bcff2da02edfa5617a37578a814f898076 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 15d04e74cbff44768452fee562dab7bcff2da02edfa5617a37578a814f898076 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1281876 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 I think we should wait for new 15.11 release https://github.com/hlamer/enki/issues/344#issuecomment-158680829 SPEC: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/enki/enki.spec SRPM: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/enki/enki-15.11.0-1.fc23.src.rpm rawhide Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12041466 epel7 Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12041470 * Thu Dec 03 2015 Raphael Groner <> - 15.11.0-1 - new version - add python-regex - remove license breakdown, now generally GPLv2+ Package looks fine now => APPROVED! Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 350 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/review/1281876-enki/licensecheck.txt ====> Whole package is GPLv2+ now as mentioned explicitly by upstream => fine [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. [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]: update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry. Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in enki [x]: gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package contains icons. Note: icons in enki [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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). [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]: 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in enki-doc ====> Not required for a -doc subpackage [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: 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 unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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: enki-15.11.0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-plugins-15.11.0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-doc-15.11.0-1.fc24.noarch.rpm enki-15.11.0-1.fc24.src.rpm enki.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary enki enki-plugins.noarch: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- enki-plugins.noarch: W: no-documentation enki.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary enki 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Requires -------- enki-plugins (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): enki python(abi) enki-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): enki (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /usr/bin/python2 PyQt4 ctags hicolor-icon-theme pyparsing python(abi) python-docutils python-markdown python-regex python2 python2-qutepart Provides -------- enki-plugins: enki-plugins enki-doc: enki-doc enki: application() application(enki.desktop) enki mimehandler(text/css) mimehandler(text/html) mimehandler(text/plain) mimehandler(text/x-adasrc) mimehandler(text/x-c++src) mimehandler(text/x-chdr) mimehandler(text/x-cmake) mimehandler(text/x-csharp) mimehandler(text/x-csrc) mimehandler(text/x-fortran) mimehandler(text/x-idl) mimehandler(text/x-java) mimehandler(text/x-lua) mimehandler(text/x-makefile) mimehandler(text/x-pascal) mimehandler(text/x-patch) mimehandler(text/x-python) mimehandler(text/x-readme) mimehandler(text/x-tcl) mimehandler(text/x-tex) mimehandler(text/x-texinfo) mimehandler(text/x-verilog) mimehandler(text/x-vhdl) mimehandler(text/xml) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/hlamer/enki/archive/v15.11.0.tar.gz#/enki-15.11.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a4faab826a02e57fe92ee842e30c9eb2ec15be0aefc6e8d5ea9af1116eb00408 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a4faab826a02e57fe92ee842e30c9eb2ec15be0aefc6e8d5ea9af1116eb00408 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1281876 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 raphgro's scratch build of enki-15.11.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for epel7 failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12041470 raphgro's scratch build of enki-15.11.0-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12041466 Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/enki enki-15.11.0-1.fc23 python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-175d04c097 enki-15.11.0-1.fc23 python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-175d04c097 enki-15.11.0-1.fc22 python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-85b822e636 enki-15.11.0-1.fc22 python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-85b822e636 enki-15.11.0-1.el7 python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-c3e2a2e9f9 enki-15.11.0-1.el7 python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-c3e2a2e9f9 enki-15.11.0-1.fc22, python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update python-qutepart enki' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-85b822e636 enki-15.11.0-1.el7, python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'yum --enablerepo=epel-testing update python-qutepart enki' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-c3e2a2e9f9 enki-15.11.0-1.fc23, python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update python-qutepart enki' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-175d04c097 enki-15.11.0-1.fc22, python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. enki-15.11.0-1.fc23, python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. Could you remove the alias for this bug please? I cannot search for Enki bugs. enki-15.11.0-2.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f154dc4371 enki-15.11.0-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-35eb73f03b enki-15.11.0-2.el7 python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-c3e2a2e9f9 enki-15.11.0-2.el7, python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2015-c3e2a2e9f9 enki-15.11.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-35eb73f03b enki-15.11.0-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-f154dc4371 enki-15.11.0-2.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. enki-15.11.0-2.el7, python-qutepart-2.2.2-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |