[Bug 1066629] Review Request: openstack-tripleo - OpenStack TripleO

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1066629



--- Comment #20 from Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
Package Review
==============

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



===== 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "Apache (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 11 files have unknown license.
     Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sdake/fedora-review/1066629
     -openstack-tripleo/licensecheck.txt
[-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/libexec/openstack-tripleo
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/libexec/openstack-tripleo
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
     Note: No (noreplace) in %config /etc/tripleo

These are justified in the spec comments

[-]: 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 30720 bytes in 2 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 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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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]: 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.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
[x]: 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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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: openstack-tripleo-0.0.2-1.20140220git.fc20.noarch.rpm
          openstack-tripleo-doc-0.0.2-1.20140220git.fc20.noarch.rpm
          openstack-tripleo-0.0.2-1.20140220git.fc20.src.rpm
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/undercloudrc
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/overcloudrc-user
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/overcloudrc
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/seedrc
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/cloudprompt
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tripleo

these are ok

openstack-tripleo.src: W: strange-permission tripleo 0755L

my speculation is because the directory has write permissions and datadir is
meant for read only data.  try removing the execute bit.  If that doesn't fix
it, we will just have to ignore this.  Also recommend changing the macro to
{%_datadir}.  It isn't any different, but it could be in the future. 
Reference:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:RPMMacros

openstack-tripleo.src: W: no-%build-section

this is fine

3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint openstack-tripleo-doc openstack-tripleo
openstack-tripleo-doc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
datacenter -> data center, data-center, centerboard
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datacenter ->
data center, data-center, centerboard
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/undercloudrc
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/overcloudrc-user
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/overcloudrc
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/seedrc
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/tripleo/cloudprompt
openstack-tripleo.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tripleo
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires
--------
openstack-tripleo-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    openstack-tripleo

openstack-tripleo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /bin/bash
    /bin/sh
    /usr/bin/env
    config(openstack-tripleo)



Provides
--------
openstack-tripleo-doc:
    openstack-tripleo-doc

openstack-tripleo:
    config(openstack-tripleo)
    openstack-tripleo



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/openstack/tripleo-incubator/archive/d305ad25f2538d829465092146de5cdfb4a803d8.tar.gz
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
fd5965b9ef811109e7d8be1754ba5b141df2e74700d5d005df6cc3c243f21186
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
fd5965b9ef811109e7d8be1754ba5b141df2e74700d5d005df6cc3c243f21186


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1066629
Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl,
Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]