First note:

As this puts files to %{_datadir}/cura-lulzbot/firmware, it should Require cura-lulzbot.

Created attachment 1196669 [details]
licensecheck output

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

NOT YET approved.

Issues
------

MUST:
 * Require cura-lulzbot for directory ownership (also, figure out what package owns the firmware dir)
 * The source files have a lot of licenses (see attachment) maybe add comment that if compiled together, this is GPLv3+?
 

SHOULD:

 * Add README? https://code.alephobjects.com/diffusion/MARLIN/browse/olivebranch/README.md
 * Write longer description?
 * This bundles a lot. It's a bit nonsense here because this is for Arduino, but still, should we indicate that?
 * Use parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro (does it parallelize anything here?)
 * Propose the patch to upstream?

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 (v2.1 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v2
     or later)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD
     like)", "BSD (3 clause)", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF
     address)", "GPL (v3 or later) LGPL (v3 or later)", "ISC", "BSD (2
     clause)", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "*No copyright* LGPL (v2.1 or
     later)". 714 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/churchyard/rpmbuild/FedoraReview/1372064
     -lulzbot-marlin-firmware/licensecheck.txt
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/cura-lulzbot
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/cura-
     lulzbot/firmware(cura-lulzbot)
[!]: 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
[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]: 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

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[-]: 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[?]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
     Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: 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:
[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: lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-1.fc23.noarch.rpm
          lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-1.fc23.src.rpm
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.noarch: W: no-documentation

Maybe consider adding https://code.alephobjects.com/diffusion/MARLIN/browse/olivebranch/README.md

lulzbot-marlin-firmware.src: W: invalid-url Source7: olivebranch_dually-1.0.2.20.tar.bz2
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.src: W: invalid-url Source6: olivebranch_flexy-1.0.2.20.tar.bz2
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.src: W: invalid-url Source5: olivebranch-1.0.2.20.tar.bz2
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.src: W: invalid-url Source4: TAZ45_dual_v2-1.0.0.1.tar.bz2
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.src: W: invalid-url Source3: TAZ45_flexydually_v2-1.0.0.1.tar.bz2
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.src: W: invalid-url Source2: TAZ45_flexy_v2-1.0.0.1.tar.bz2
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.src: W: invalid-url Source1: TAZ45_standard_v2-1.0.0.1.tar.bz2
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
lulzbot-marlin-firmware.noarch: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warning.



Requires
--------
lulzbot-marlin-firmware (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
lulzbot-marlin-firmware:
    lulzbot-marlin-firmware



Source checksums
----------------
https://devel.lulzbot.com/mini/Gladiola/software/firmware/Marlin_Gladiola_v1.1.0.8_1199cb9.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 12c7820ff248b282e226d5c9fec9dced394fd49cb1ddca48e5cd8b458dc0c5e1
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 12c7820ff248b282e226d5c9fec9dced394fd49cb1ddca48e5cd8b458dc0c5e1

All items fixed, patch sent upstream.

New SRPM: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.fc24.src.rpm
New SPEC: https://spot.fedorapeople.org/lulzbot-marlin-firmware.spec

APPROVED.

Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/lulzbot-marlin-firmware

lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.fc23 cura-lulzbot-20.03-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ee9da2ee76

lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.fc24 cura-lulzbot-20.03-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-cbf272a739

lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.fc25 cura-lulzbot-20.03-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0d3edd2802

cura-lulzbot-20.03-2.fc25, lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.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-2016-0d3edd2802

cura-lulzbot-20.03-2.fc23, lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.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-ee9da2ee76

cura-lulzbot-20.03-2.fc24, lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.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-cbf272a739

cura-lulzbot-20.03-2.fc25, lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

cura-lulzbot-20.03-2.fc24, lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

cura-lulzbot-20.03-2.fc23, lulzbot-marlin-firmware-20.03-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.