https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121558
Bug ID: 2121558
Summary: Review Request: openfec - Application-Level Forward
Erasure Correction codes
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
Reporter: jskarvad(a)redhat.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/openfec/openfec.spec
SRPM URL:
https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/openfec/openfec-1.4.2-1.fc35.src.rpm
Description: Application-Level Forward Erasure Correction codes, or AL-FEC
(also called UL-FEC, for Upper-Layers FEC). The idea, in one line, is to add
redundancy in order to be able to recover from erasures. Because of their
position in the communication stack, these codes are implemented as software
codecs, and they find many applications in robust transmission and distrituted
storage systems.
Fedora Account System Username: jskarvad
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2121558
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187030
Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #38 from Benson Muite <benson_muite(a)emailplus.org> ---
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
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: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License, Version
2", "[generated file]", "FSF Unlimited License (with License
Retention) GNU General Public License v2.0 or later [generated file]",
"FSF Unlimited License [generated file]", "GNU General Public License
v2.0 or later [generated file]", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or
later", "X11 License [generated file]", "GNU General Public License
v2.0 or later", "FSF Unlimited License (with License Retention) GNU
General Public License, Version 2", "FSF Unlimited License (with
License Retention)", "GNU General Public License". 73 files have
unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/giza/1187030-giza/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/gfortran
[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.
[x]: 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 225280 bytes in 5 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 %license.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.2.0
configuration:
/usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/licenses.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 5
giza-doc.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/share/doc/giza-doc/documentation/api-ref.html
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libX11.so.6
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libcairo.so.2
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libfontconfig.so.1
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libfreetype.so.6
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libX11.so.6
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libcairo.so.2
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libfontconfig.so.1
giza.x86_64: E: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libpgplot.so.0.1.2
/lib64/libfreetype.so.6
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/.dwz/giza-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libcpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libgiza.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: E: statically-linked-binary
/usr/lib/debug/.dwz/giza-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-documentation
giza-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation
giza-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: E: missing-PT_GNU_STACK-section
/usr/lib/debug/.dwz/giza-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: E: ldd-failed
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libcpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug
/usr/bin/bash: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8)
ldd: warning: you do not have execution permission for
`/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libcpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug'
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: E: ldd-failed
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libgiza.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug
/usr/bin/bash: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8)
ldd: warning: you do not have execution permission for
`/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libgiza.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug'
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: E: ldd-failed
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug
/usr/bin/bash: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8)
ldd: warning: you do not have execution permission for
`/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug'
giza-doc.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0
giza.x86_64: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0
giza-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0
giza-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license GPL-2.0
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/debug/.dwz
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/debug/.dwz
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/11/5e220112899fca4a2b28f69c7da59518221c39
../../../.build-id/11/5e220112899fca4a2b28f69c7da59518221c39
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/54/d3de17eb0c2d6d2dc0ed46ade78acd9a21e013
../../../.build-id/54/d3de17eb0c2d6d2dc0ed46ade78acd9a21e013
giza-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
/usr/lib/debug/.build-id/63/88feac176a2a08810d1d78814c30f0bd5a2cb3
../../../.build-id/63/88feac176a2a08810d1d78814c30f0bd5a2cb3
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 17 warnings, 14 badness; has
taken 4.9 s
Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/danieljprice/giza/releases/download/v1.3.2/giza-v1.3.2.t…
:
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
87f14679923ba729a13bc18026178be684d7620aaf0a5eb4172a4a1c9c87c033
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
87f14679923ba729a13bc18026178be684d7620aaf0a5eb4172a4a1c9c87c033
Requires
--------
giza (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
libX11.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libcairo.so.2()(64bit)
libfontconfig.so.1()(64bit)
libfreetype.so.6()(64bit)
libgfortran.so.5()(64bit)
libgfortran.so.5(GFORTRAN_10)(64bit)
libgfortran.so.5(GFORTRAN_8)(64bit)
libgiza.so.0()(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
giza-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/usr/bin/pkg-config
gcc-gfortran(x86-64)
giza(x86-64)
libcpgplot.so.0()(64bit)
libgiza.so.0()(64bit)
libpgplot.so.0()(64bit)
giza-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
giza-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
giza-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides
--------
giza:
giza
giza(x86-64)
libcpgplot.so.0()(64bit)
libgiza.so.0()(64bit)
libpgplot.so.0()(64bit)
giza-devel:
giza-devel
giza-devel(x86-64)
pkgconfig(cpgplot)
pkgconfig(giza)
pkgconfig(pgplot)
giza-doc:
giza-doc
giza-debuginfo:
debuginfo(build-id)
giza-debuginfo
giza-debuginfo(x86-64)
libcpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug()(64bit)
libgiza.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug()(64bit)
libpgplot.so.0.1.2-1.3.2-3.fc38.x86_64.debug()(64bit)
giza-debugsource:
giza-debugsource
giza-debugsource(x86-64)
Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1187030
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, Ruby, Haskell, Perl, R, Python, SugarActivity, fonts,
Ocaml, Java
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Comments:
a) Thanks for packaging this and your patience. Seems ok to me.
b) You will need to find a sponsor. It helps to do a few unofficial reviews of
other packages:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Packager_sponsor_policy/#request…
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1187030
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2109341
Bug ID: 2109341
Summary: Review Request: python-azure-storage-blob Azure
Storage Blobs client library for Python
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
Reporter: rj.layco(a)gmail.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL:
https://rommell.fedorapeople.org/python-azure-storage-blob/python-azure-sto…
SRPM URL:
https://rommell.fedorapeople.org/python-azure-storage-blob/python-azure-sto…
Description:
Azure Blob storage is Microsoft's object storage solution for the cloud. Blob
storage is optimized for storing massive amounts of unstructured data, such as
text or binary data.
Blob storage is ideal for:
Serving images or documents directly to a browser
Storing files for distributed access
Streaming video and audio
Storing data for backup and restore, disaster recovery, and archiving
Storing data for analysis by an on-premises or Azure-hosted service
Fedora Account System Username: rommell
koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=89770875
--
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2109341
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120465
Bug ID: 2120465
Summary: Review Request:
golang-github-bradenhilton-mozillainstallhash - Gets
the hash used to differentiate between installs of
Mozilla software
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Assignee: nobody(a)fedoraproject.org
Reporter: hello(a)anthonyrabbito.com
QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org
CC: package-review(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/anthr76/golang-to-fedora…
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/anthr76/golang-to-fedora…
Description: Go package which generates the hash used to differentiate between
installs of Mozilla software
Fedora Account System Username: anthr76/@GoSig
--
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120465