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
Bug 957927 - Review Request: nodejs-pedding - Just pedding for callback
Summary: Review Request: nodejs-pedding - Just pedding for callback
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
Blocks: nodejs-reviews 957930
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2013-04-29 23:35 UTC by Tom Hughes
Modified: 2020-11-05 10:05 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version: nodejs-tilelive-4.4.3-2.fc18
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2013-06-07 23:48:49 UTC
Type: Bug
jamielinux: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Tom Hughes 2013-04-29 23:35:43 UTC
Spec URL:
Fedora Account System Username: tomh

Just pedding for callback

Comment 1 Jamie Nguyen 2013-05-26 17:18:38 UTC
Package Review

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

===== MUST items =====

[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[-]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
     upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
     licenses manually.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
[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]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[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).

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

[-]: 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.
[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
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.

===== EXTRA items =====

[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).

Checking: nodejs-pedding-0.0.1-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
nodejs-pedding.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
# rpmlint nodejs-pedding
nodejs-pedding.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'

nodejs-pedding (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):


Source checksums
---------------- :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : a885b79d90f1b9ba7db3c9d9fc6f766024b42f5a17ee2ba2806e8877867b963e
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a885b79d90f1b9ba7db3c9d9fc6f766024b42f5a17ee2ba2806e8877867b963e

Generated by fedora-review 0.4.1 (b2e211f) last change: 2013-04-29
Buildroot used: fedora-18-x86_64
Command line :/bin/fedora-review -r -n nodejs-pedding-0.0.1-1.fc18.src.rpm

Comment 2 Jamie Nguyen 2013-05-26 17:20:57 UTC
Looks good, package approved!

The rm -rf node_modules doesn't seem necessary, but no harm leaving there I suppose (and in fact it wouldn't be a bad thing if every node module did the same in %prep by default anyway).

Comment 3 Tom Hughes 2013-05-26 18:07:37 UTC
New Package SCM Request
Package Name: nodejs-pedding
Short Description: Just pedding for callback
Owners: tomh
Branches: f18 f19

Comment 4 Gwyn Ciesla 2013-05-28 15:30:40 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2013-05-28 19:24:54 UTC
nodejs-tilelive-4.4.3-2.fc18,nodejs-tilejson-0.3.4-1.fc18,nodejs-agentkeepalive-0.1.5-2.fc18,nodejs-pedding-0.0.1-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.,nodejs-tilejson-0.3.4-1.fc18,nodejs-agentkeepalive-0.1.5-2.fc18,nodejs-pedding-0.0.1-1.fc18

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2013-05-30 03:06:21 UTC
nodejs-tilelive-4.4.3-2.fc18, nodejs-tilejson-0.3.4-1.fc18, nodejs-agentkeepalive-0.1.5-2.fc18, nodejs-pedding-0.0.1-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2013-06-07 23:48:49 UTC
nodejs-tilelive-4.4.3-2.fc18, nodejs-tilejson-0.3.4-1.fc18, nodejs-agentkeepalive-0.1.5-2.fc18, nodejs-pedding-0.0.1-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.