| Summary: | Review request: zboy - A GameBoy emulator | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Package Reviews | Reporter: | Andrea Musuruane <musuruan> |
| Component: | Review Request | Assignee: | A. Trande (sagitter) <trpost> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | rpmfusion-package-review |
| Priority: | P5 | ||
| Version: | Current | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | GNU/Linux | ||
| namespace: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | |||
| Bug Blocks: | 4 | ||
|
Description
Andrea Musuruane
2015-05-14 14:02:27 CEST
- Please, mark license.txt with %license macro. - 'tools/icon' directory cointains .png icons which can be packaged under '/usr/share/icons/zboy' and used to make a .desktop file. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - 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. Note: License file license.txt is marked as %doc instead of %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 62 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/zboy/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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 71680 bytes in 5 files. [!]: 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]: 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]: 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]: 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. [-]: 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]: 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 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [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 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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: zboy-0.60-1.fc24.i686.rpm zboy-0.60-1.fc24.src.rpm zboy.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multiplatform -> multiform, formulation, formulator zboy.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gameboys -> game boys, game-boys, homeboys zboy.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zboy zboy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multiplatform -> multiform, formulation, formulator zboy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gameboys -> game boys, game-boys, homeboys 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: zboy-debuginfo-0.60-1.fc24.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory zboy.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zboy 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- zboy (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libSDL2-2.0.so.0 libc.so.6 rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- zboy: zboy zboy(x86-32) Source checksums ---------------- http://downloads.sourceforge.net/zboy/zboy-0.60.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f81e61433a5b74c61ab84cac33da598deb03e49699f3d65dcb983151a6f1c749 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f81e61433a5b74c61ab84cac33da598deb03e49699f3d65dcb983151a6f1c749 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-i386-rpmfusion_free -rn zboy-0.60-1.fc21.src.rpm Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6- Please, mark license.txt with %license macro. - 'tools/icon' directory cointains .png icons which can be packaged under '/usr/share/icons/zboy' and used to make a .desktop file. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - 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. Note: License file license.txt is marked as %doc instead of %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 62 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/zboy/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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 71680 bytes in 5 files. [!]: 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]: 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]: 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]: 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. [-]: 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]: 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 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [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 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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: zboy-0.60-1.fc24.i686.rpm zboy-0.60-1.fc24.src.rpm zboy.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multiplatform -> multiform, formulation, formulator zboy.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gameboys -> game boys, game-boys, homeboys zboy.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zboy zboy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multiplatform -> multiform, formulation, formulator zboy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gameboys -> game boys, game-boys, homeboys 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: zboy-debuginfo-0.60-1.fc24.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory zboy.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zboy 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Requires -------- zboy (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libSDL2-2.0.so.0 libc.so.6 rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- zboy: zboy zboy(x86-32) Source checksums ---------------- http://downloads.sourceforge.net/zboy/zboy-0.60.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f81e61433a5b74c61ab84cac33da598deb03e49699f3d65dcb983151a6f1c749 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f81e61433a5b74c61ab84cac33da598deb03e49699f3d65dcb983151a6f1c749 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-i386-rpmfusion_free -rn zboy-0.60-1.fc21.src.rpm Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12575912/reviews/zboy.spec https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/12575912/reviews/zboy-0.60-2.fc21.src.rpm Changelog: * Sun Oct 04 2015 Andrea Musuruane <musuruan@gmail.com> 0.60-2 - Correctly marked license file BTW, I didn't include a desktop file because the emulator doesn't have a GUI and it must be run from a terminal. > BTW, I didn't include a desktop file because the emulator doesn't have a GUI > and it must be run from a terminal. Ops! Sorry i hadn't tried it yet. > License: GPLv3 'zboy.c' is licensed with a GPLv3+ license. Please, ask to upstream to clarify which is the definitive license. However, GPLv3 and GPLv3+ are compatible, this package may be licensed with a GPLv3+ with an additional GPLv3+ text file. Package approved. (In reply to comment #3) > 'zboy.c' is licensed with a GPLv3+ license. Please, ask to upstream to clarify > which is the definitive license. However, GPLv3 and GPLv3+ are compatible, this > package may be licensed with a GPLv3+ with an additional GPLv3+ text file. The License: field refers to the licenses of the contents of the binary rpm: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License:_field Therefore the resulting license is GPLv3 (GPLv3+ and GPLv3 -> GPLv3). There is no problem about it. Upstream can mix every license they want as long as they are compatible. Package CVS request ====================== Package Name: zboy Short Description: A GameBoy emulator Owners: musuruan Branches: F21 F22 F23 InitialCC: ---------------------- License tag: free Imported into the git repository and built. |