https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1939978
--- Comment #7 from Ibiam <ibiamchihurumnaya(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #6)
-Please use the Fedora default build flags:
%build
CFLAGS="${CFLAGS:-${RPM_OPT_FLAGS}}"
LDFLAGS="${LDFLAGS:-${RPM_LD_FLAGS}}" \
python3 ./setup.py build
%install
CFLAGS="${CFLAGS:-${RPM_OPT_FLAGS}}"
LDFLAGS="${LDFLAGS:-${RPM_LD_FLAGS}}" \
python3 ./setup.py install --prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_prefix}
Seems the distro flags are needed when compiling C/C++ code and the package
doesnt' contain any.
- Why do you remove the desktop file?
rm %{buildroot}%{_prefix}/share/applications/*.desktop || true
The desktop file is removed because the can create icons for running sugar
activities
outside the sugar desktop on other desktops and sugar activities were meant to
be run
from the sugar desktop.
- You must include the COPYING.MIT:
%license COPYING COPYING.MIT
- This is not correct:
sed -i 's/env python/python3/' *.py cairoplot/*.py
If a py file already contains 'env python3', the result will be 'env
python33'
In any case the shebangs should be removed in prep:
usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/setup.py
1:#!/usr/bin/python33
usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/helpbutton.py
1:#!/usr/bin/python3
usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/gencards.py
1:#!/usr/bin/python3
usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/dimensions.py
1:#!/usr/bin/python3
usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/cairoplot/series.py
1:#!/usr/bin/python3
usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/cairoplot/setup.py
1:#!/usr/bin/python3
usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/cairoplot/cairoplot.py
1:#!/usr/bin/python3
See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
Packaging_tricks#Remove_shebang_from_Python_libraries
for lib in $(find . -name "*.py" -type f); do
sed '1{\@^#!/usr/bin/env python@d}' $lib > $lib.new &&
touch -r $lib $lib.new &&
mv $lib.new $lib
done
Thanks for that, fixed.
- Don't mix tabs and spaces
- Fix the obsolete FSF address and send the patch upstream:
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/cairoplot/cairoplot.py
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/cairoplot/series.py
It's a license and the version used still contains same address hence I can't
just change it.
- Don't fix %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT Choose only one.
Fixed, thanks.
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
=======
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
- Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
See:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_macros
- 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 COPYING.MIT is not marked as %license
See:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text
===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License", "GNU
General Public
License v3.0 or later", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version
2.1", "GNU Library General Public License v2 or later [obsolete FSF
postal address (Temple Place)]". 200 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/sugar-
dimensions/review-sugar-dimensions/licensecheck.txt
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[-]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/share/locale/gug/LC_MESSAGES,
/usr/share/locale/gug
[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]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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 10240 bytes in 1 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]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
===== 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).
[?]: 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.
[-]: 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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[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:
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
Note: Mock build failed
See:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_use_rpmlint
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: sugar-dimensions-60-1.fc35.noarch.rpm
sugar-dimensions-60-1.fc35.src.rpm
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/cairoplot/cairoplot.py
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/cairoplot/series.py
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/gencards.py 644
/usr/bin/python3
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/sugar/activities/Dimensions.activity/helpbutton.py 644
/usr/bin/python3
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: invalid-lc-messages-dir
/usr/share/locale/aym/LC_MESSAGES/org.sugarlabs.VisualMatchActivity.mo
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: invalid-lc-messages-dir
/usr/share/locale/nah/LC_MESSAGES/org.sugarlabs.VisualMatchActivity.mo
sugar-dimensions.noarch: E: invalid-lc-messages-dir
/usr/share/locale/son/LC_MESSAGES/org.sugarlabs.VisualMatchActivity.mo
sugar-dimensions.src:13: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1,
tab: line 13)
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 1 warnings.
Fixed, thanks.
--
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