> kwallet support NOT found,will not build kwallet functionality

Added KF5Notifications to BuildRequires.

Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14899638

Please use a valid src rpm
(lxqt-admin-0.10.0-2.20160705git8acfd2a.fc24.src.rpm)

Spec URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/lx/lxqt-wallet.spec
SRPM URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/qt/lx/lxqt-wallet-2.2.1-1.fc24.src.rpm

Please, remove:
BuildRequires:  gcc-c++

and change

BuildRequires:  libsecret-devel

with

BuildRequires:  pkgconfig(libsecret-1)

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc-c++
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2


===== 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]: 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". 10 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1356657-lxqt-
     wallet/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 4 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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== 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 lxqt-
     wallet-debuginfo
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[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]: 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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[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:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: lxqt-wallet-2.2.1-1.fc25.i686.rpm
          lxqt-wallet-devel-2.2.1-1.fc25.i686.rpm
          lxqt-wallet-debuginfo-2.2.1-1.fc25.i686.rpm
          lxqt-wallet-2.2.1-1.fc25.src.rpm
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kwallet -> wallet, k wallet, walleye
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US kwallet -> wallet, k wallet, walleye
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libgcrypt -> cryptically
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cryptographic -> cryptography, cryptographer, crystallographic
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backend -> backed, back end, back-end
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lxqt_wallet-cli
lxqt-wallet.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kwallet -> wallet, k wallet, walleye
lxqt-wallet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US kwallet -> wallet, k wallet, walleye
lxqt-wallet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libgcrypt -> cryptically
lxqt-wallet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cryptographic -> cryptography, cryptographer, crystallographic
lxqt-wallet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backend -> backed, back end, back-end
lxqt-wallet.src:83: W: macro-in-comment %{srcname}
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: lxqt-wallet-debuginfo-2.2.1-1.fc25.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kwallet -> wallet, k wallet, walleye
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US kwallet -> wallet, k wallet, walleye
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libgcrypt -> cryptically
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cryptographic -> cryptography, cryptographer, crystallographic
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backend -> backed, back end, back-end
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/liblxqtwallet.so.2.0.0 /lib/libKF5Notifications.so.5
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/liblxqtwallet.so.2.0.0 /lib/libgio-2.0.so.0
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/liblxqtwallet.so.2.0.0 /lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/liblxqtwallet.so.2.0.0 /lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/liblxqtwallet.so.2.0.0 /lib/libm.so.6
lxqt-wallet.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lxqt_wallet-cli
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings.



Requires
--------
lxqt-wallet (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /sbin/ldconfig
    libKF5Notifications.so.5
    libKF5Wallet.so.5
    libQt5Core.so.5
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)
    libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.6)
    libQt5Gui.so.5
    libQt5Gui.so.5(Qt_5)
    libQt5Widgets.so.5
    libQt5Widgets.so.5(Qt_5)
    libc.so.6
    libgcc_s.so.1
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)
    libgcrypt.so.20
    libgcrypt.so.20(GCRYPT_1.6)
    libgio-2.0.so.0
    libglib-2.0.so.0
    libgobject-2.0.so.0
    libm.so.6
    libsecret-1.so.0
    libstdc++.so.6
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

lxqt-wallet-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

lxqt-wallet-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    liblxqt-devel(x86-32)
    liblxqtwallet.so.2.0.0
    lxqt-wallet(x86-32)



Provides
--------
lxqt-wallet:
    liblxqtwallet.so.2.0.0
    lxqt-wallet
    lxqt-wallet(x86-32)

lxqt-wallet-debuginfo:
    lxqt-wallet-debuginfo
    lxqt-wallet-debuginfo(x86-32)

lxqt-wallet-devel:
    lxqt-wallet-devel
    lxqt-wallet-devel(x86-32)
    pkgconfig(lxqtwallet)



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/mhogomchungu/lxqt_wallet/archive/2.2.1/lxqt-wallet-2.2.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 533af761d5142f7acade6ca6099a232bc8a99e186860c49b445f77b541544d21
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 533af761d5142f7acade6ca6099a232bc8a99e186860c49b445f77b541544d21


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1356657 --plugins C/C++ -m fedora-rawhide-i386
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Issues:
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc-c++
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2

see also Comment#4

(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4)
> Please, remove:
> BuildRequires:  gcc-c++

Some people like to see gcc etc. explicitly listed, anyways fixed.

> and change
> 
> BuildRequires:  libsecret-devel
> 
> with
> 
> BuildRequires:  pkgconfig(libsecret-1)

Fixed.

Approved

Thanks again for the good work!

Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/lxqt-wallet

(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #7)
> (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4)
> > Please, remove:
> > BuildRequires:  gcc-c++
> 
> Some people like to see gcc etc. explicitly listed, anyways fixed.
Please, revert this change i was not aware of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequires_and_Requires

(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #10)
> Package request has been approved:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/lxqt-wallet

Will import when zuluCrypt finally unbundled.

(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #11)
> (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #7)
> > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #4)
> > > Please, remove:
> > > BuildRequires:  gcc-c++
> > 
> > Some people like to see gcc etc. explicitly listed, anyways fixed.
> Please, revert this change i was not aware of
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
> C_and_C%2B%2B#BuildRequires_and_Requires

Will do. That shouldn't be a big issue because gcc is still installed by default.

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-f08257b92c

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0f2d6af926

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.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-2016-0f2d6af926

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.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-2016-f08257b92c

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.fc24 zulucrypt-5.0.0-2.20160802git064e9db.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0f2d6af926

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.el7 zulucrypt-5.0.0-2.20160802git064e9db.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-f08257b92c

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.fc24, zulucrypt-5.0.0-2.20160802git064e9db.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-2016-0f2d6af926

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.el7, zulucrypt-5.0.0-2.20160802git064e9db.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-2016-f08257b92c

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.fc24, zulucrypt-5.0.0-2.20160802git064e9db.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-f08257b92c

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.el7, zulucrypt-5.0.0-3.20160802git064e9db.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-2016-f08257b92c

lxqt-wallet-3.0.0-1.el7, zulucrypt-5.0.0-3.20160802git064e9db.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.