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 823101
Summary: | Review Request: erlang-riak_pipe - Riak Pipelines | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Peter Lemenkov <lemenkov> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Brendan Jones <brendan.jones.it> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | brendan.jones.it, notting, package-review |
Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | brendan.jones.it:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2012-07-18 05:30:50 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: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 639263, 652598, 671884 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 652629, 841766 |
Description
Peter Lemenkov
2012-05-19 04:48:48 UTC
Unblocking NotReady - all required packages are available at least in Rawhide. Koji scratchbuild for Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4239711 I will take this review I'm assuming this is being built for EPEL5. This package is APPROVED. Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== Generic ==== [x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: EXTRA Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 [-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [x]: MUST 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. [!]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Package is not relocatable. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: MUST Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: 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. [x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [x]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. Note: Source0 (basho-riak_pipe-1.1.2-0-g6442123.tar.gz) [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. Issues: [!]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag [!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions [!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 See: None [!]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#ValidLicenseShortNames Rpmlint ------- Checking: erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.fc18.src.rpm erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm erlang-riak_pipe.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Riak -> Rick, Risk, Rial erlang-riak_pipe.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Riak -> Rick, Risk, Rial erlang-riak_pipe.src: W: invalid-url Source0: basho-riak_pipe-1.1.2-0-g6442123.tar.gz erlang-riak_pipe.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency erlang-stdlib erlang-riak_pipe.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Riak -> Rick, Risk, Rial erlang-riak_pipe.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Riak -> Rick, Risk, Rial erlang-riak_pipe.x86_64: E: no-binary erlang-riak_pipe.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Requires -------- erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): erlang-cluster_info erlang-erts >= R13B erlang-hipe erlang-kernel erlang-lager erlang-riak_core erlang-stdlib Provides -------- erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm: erlang-riak_pipe = 1.1.2-1.fc18 erlang-riak_pipe(x86-64) = 1.1.2-1.fc18 Thanks for reviewing this! I'm considering building it for EL5 but don't have any plans for that so far. that's why all EL5-related messages should be addressed. So before importing I'm going to * Drop explicit BuildRoot * Drop %defattr(-,root,root,-) * Drop %clean target * Remove rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT from the %install section New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: erlang-riak_pipe Short Description: Riak Pipelines Owners: peter Branches: f17 el6 InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.fc17 erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.el6 erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. erlang-riak_pipe-1.1.2-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. |