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

Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated



==== C/C++ ====
[x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[!]: MUST ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
     Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in %post
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.


==== Generic ====
[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 All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
     that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
     Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
     Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
     Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[-]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: 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 Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: 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
[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.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[!]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict.
[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.
[?]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
<snip>
xosd.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/xosd-2.2.14/COPYING
xosd-devel.i686: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/xosd-config.1.gz 14: warning: macro `l' not defined
</snip>
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
     provided in the spec URL.
/home/contyk/src/review/756780/xosd_2.2.14.orig.tar.gz :
  MD5SUM this package     : 4b349fe930e4eee2f504d6c02673e24d
  MD5SUM upstream package : 4b349fe930e4eee2f504d6c02673e24d

[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 a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
     upstream.
[!]: SHOULD Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[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.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[-]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define.

Issues:
NOTE: There are no reason for the used patches. What's their purpose? (Patch1 esp.)
TODO: Usual FSF address in license issue; poke upstream.
NOTE: See what you could do about the manpage macro warning. (not a blocker)
TODO: Use a fully versioned, arch specific base package Requires in the devel subpackage, i.e. Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}


Generated by fedora-review 0.1.1
External plugins:

Updated package is on the same location. I changed URL and Source to reflect new upstream home.

--- a/xosd.spec
+++ b/xosd.spec
@@ -4,10 +4,9 @@ Release:        15%{?dist}
 Summary:        On-screen display library for X
 Group:          System Environment/Libraries
 License:        GPLv2+
-URL:            http://www.ignavus.net/software.html
-Source:         http://ftp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/x/xosd/%{name}_%{version}.orig.tar.
+URL:            http://sourceforge.net/projects/libxosd/
+Source:         http://downloads.sourceforge.net/libxosd/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
 Patch0:         %{name}-aclocal18.patch
-Patch1:         %{name}-defaults.patch
 BuildRequires:  libX11-devel
 BuildRequires:  libXext-devel
 BuildRequires:  libXinerama-devel
@@ -25,7 +24,7 @@ the effect of an On Screen Display, like your TV/VCR etc.
 %package        devel
 Summary:        Development files for the XOSD on-screen display library
 Group:          Development/Libraries
-Requires:       %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
+Requires:       %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
 Requires:       libX11-devel
 Requires:       libXext-devel
 Requires:       libXinerama-devel
@@ -37,7 +36,6 @@ on-screen display.
 %prep
 %setup -q
 %patch0 -p0
-%patch1 -p1
 for f in ChangeLog man/xosd_{create,destroy,display,is_onscreen,set_bar_length}.3 ; do
     iconv -f iso-8859-1 -t utf-8 "$f" > "${f}.utf8"
     touch -r "$f" "${f}.utf8"
@@ -82,11 +80,13 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/%{name}
 %{_mandir}/man3/xosd*.3*
 
 %changelog
-* Thu Nov 24 2011 Petr Pisar <ppisar> - 2.2.14-15
+* Fri Jan 13 2012 Petr Pisar <ppisar> - 2.2.14-15
 - Disable XMMS plug-in because gdk-pixpuf-0 has been removed
 - Remove build-optional static library
 - Clean spec file up 
 - Do not package XMMS plug-in pixmaps
+- Remove patch changing default offset to keep closer with upstream
+- Update upstream URLs
 
 * Tue Feb 08 2011 Fedora Release Engineering <rel-eng.org> - 2.2.14-14
 - Rebuilt for https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_15_Mass_Rebuild


---
Approving.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: xosd
New Branches: 
Owners: ppisar
InitialCC: 

Please assign this deprecated package in rawhide (F17) to me and make it undeprecated.

Unretired, take ownership in pkgdb.

Thank you for the review and the unretiring. Rel-engs have been asked to unblock this package in F17 (https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5028).

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: xosd
New Branches: el6
Owners: ppisar

Git done (by process-git-requests).

xosd-2.2.14-16.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xosd-2.2.14-16.el6

xosd-2.2.14-16.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.

*** Bug 1471023 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

xosd-2.2.14-24.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-203bf9e58e

xosd-2.2.14-24.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-2017-203bf9e58e

xosd-2.2.14-24.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.