1:54 p.m.
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3278
--- Comment #2 from Miro Hrončok <mhroncok(a)redhat.com> 2014-09-03 15:54:50 CEST ---
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
===== Issues =====
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
From my POV, this is GPLv2+, see COPYRIGHT or sources
===== 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.
From my POV, this is GPLv2+, see COPYRIGHT or sources
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 122880 bytes in 12 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 %doc.
[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]: 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]: 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 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
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[-]: 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
mingw32-libmad , mingw64-libmad
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: 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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
Note: mingw64-libmad : /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-
root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/mad.pc mingw32-libmad : /usr/i686-w64-mingw32
/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/mad.pc
[-]: 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]: 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
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[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]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: mingw32-libmad-0.15.1b-1.fc20.noarch.rpm
mingw64-libmad-0.15.1b-1.fc20.noarch.rpm
mingw-libmad-0.15.1b-1.fc20.src.rpm
mingw32-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libmad/COPYING
mingw32-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libmad/COPYRIGHT
mingw32-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/mad.h
mingw64-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw64-libmad/COPYING
mingw64-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/mad.h
mingw64-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw64-libmad/COPYRIGHT
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint mingw64-libmad mingw32-libmad
mingw64-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw64-libmad/COPYING
mingw64-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/mad.h
mingw64-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw64-libmad/COPYRIGHT
mingw32-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libmad/COPYING
mingw32-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/mingw32-libmad/COPYRIGHT
mingw32-libmad.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/mad.h
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 0 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires
--------
mingw64-libmad (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
mingw64(kernel32.dll)
mingw64(msvcrt.dll)
mingw64-crt
mingw64-filesystem
mingw64-pkg-config
mingw32-libmad (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
mingw32(kernel32.dll)
mingw32(msvcrt.dll)
mingw32-crt
mingw32-filesystem
mingw32-pkg-config
Provides
--------
mingw64-libmad:
mingw64(libmad-0.dll)
mingw64-libmad
mingw32-libmad:
mingw32(libmad-0.dll)
mingw32-libmad
Source checksums
----------------
http://download.sourceforge.net/mad/libmad-0.15.1b.tar.gz :
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
bbfac3ed6bfbc2823d3775ebb931087371e142bb0e9bb1bee51a76a6e0078690
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
bbfac3ed6bfbc2823d3775ebb931087371e142bb0e9bb1bee51a76a6e0078690
Package NOT APPROVED. Fix the license tag.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.