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 1448559
Summary: | Review Request: python-xapp - Python bindings for xapps | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | leigh scott <leigh123linux> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Björn 'besser82' Esser <besser82> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | besser82, package-review |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
Target Release: | --- | Flags: | besser82:
fedora-review+
|
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2017-05-15 04:27:05 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
leigh scott
2017-05-05 18:15:47 UTC
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 15 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/besser82/vm_shared/fedora/review/1448559-python- xapp/licensecheck.txt ---> Sources are licensed under the LGPLv2. Please fix the license-tag. [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. [-]: 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. [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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines ---> License is incorrect. [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [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. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2-xapp , python3-xapp [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. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: 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]: 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: [-]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.4.1 starting (python version = 3.6.1)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux disabled Finish: init plugins Start: init plugins INFO: selinux disabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 1.4.1 INFO: Mock Version: 1.4.1 Finish: chroot init Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 1.4.1 INFO: Mock Version: 1.4.1 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/besser82/vm_shared/fedora/review/1448559-python-xapp/results/python3-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/besser82/vm_shared/fedora/review/1448559-python-xapp/results/python2-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed: # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 58c90144a07c4687b6f94ced67e52c81 -D /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64-bootstrap/root -a --setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash --setenv=HOME=/builddir --setenv=HOSTNAME=mock --setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin --setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf "\033]0;<mock-chroot>\007" --setenv=PS1=<mock-chroot> \s-\v\$ --setenv=LANG=de_DE.utf8 --setenv=LC_MESSAGES=C /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 27 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/besser82/vm_shared/fedora/review/1448559-python-xapp/results/python3-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/besser82/vm_shared/fedora/review/1448559-python-xapp/results/python2-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm python3-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc27.src.rpm python2-xapp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) xapps -> apps, Lapps, x apps python2-xapp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xapps -> apps, Lapps, x apps python2-xapp.noarch: W: no-documentation python2-xapp.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/python2-xapp/COPYING python3-xapp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) xapps -> apps, Lapps, x apps python3-xapp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xapps -> apps, Lapps, x apps python3-xapp.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-xapp.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/python3-xapp/COPYING python-xapp.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) xapps -> apps, Lapps, x apps python-xapp.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xapps -> apps, Lapps, x apps python-xapp.src: E: specfile-error Python detected LC_CTYPE=C: LC_ALL & LANG coerced to C.UTF-8 (set another locale or PYTHONCOERCECLOCALE=0 to disable this locale coercion behaviour). python-xapp.src: E: specfile-error Python detected LC_CTYPE=C: LC_ALL & LANG coerced to C.UTF-8 (set another locale or PYTHONCOERCECLOCALE=0 to disable this locale coercion behaviour). python-xapp.src: E: specfile-error Python detected LC_CTYPE=C: LC_ALL & LANG coerced to C.UTF-8 (set another locale or PYTHONCOERCECLOCALE=0 to disable this locale coercion behaviour). 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 8 warnings. ---> Please inform upstream about the incorrect FSF-address. You may want to pick up debian/changelog and PKG-INFO in %doc. Requires -------- python2-xapp (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python2-psutil python3-xapp (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-psutil Provides -------- python2-xapp: python-xapp python2-xapp python2.7dist(python-xapp) python2dist(python-xapp) python3-xapp: python3-xapp python3.6dist(python-xapp) python3dist(python-xapp) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/linuxmint/python-xapp/archive/1.0.0.tar.gz#/python-xapp-1.0.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b23af883b386706329fa955dbf8ef9c939084475be803160510df88437f9a600 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b23af883b386706329fa955dbf8ef9c939084475be803160510df88437f9a600 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1448559 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 ===== Solution ===== Package approved! Please fix the incorrect license-tag and consider my suggestions about %doc in rpmlint section. Please add me to the list of co-maintainers, too. Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-xapp python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-39c469d75a python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc25 lightdm-settings-1.0.3-1.fc25 slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-1a19dcd43d python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc26 lightdm-settings-1.0.3-1.fc26 slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-bc46f0d318 python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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-2017-39c469d75a lightdm-settings-1.0.3-1.fc25, python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc25, slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2017-1a19dcd43d lightdm-settings-1.0.3-1.fc26, python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc26, slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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-2017-bc46f0d318 lightdm-settings-1.0.4-1.fc25 python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc25 slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-1a19dcd43d lightdm-settings-1.0.3-1.fc26, python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc26, slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. lightdm-settings-1.0.4-1.fc25, python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc25, slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2017-1a19dcd43d python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. lightdm-settings-1.0.4-1.fc25, python-xapp-1.0.0-1.fc25, slick-greeter-1.0.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |