[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-721f1da0ae

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-2c9f971c67

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|CLOSED  |ON_QA
 Resolution|RAWHIDE |---
   Keywords||Reopened



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing
repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug
report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8c1e55e18e

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050

Panu Matilainen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2016-04-22 09:09:18



--- Comment #8 from Panu Matilainen  ---
John, thanks for the review, and you're obviously welcome as a co-maintainer if
you want.

Packages built + updates submitted for all active Fedora versions, considering
this case closed.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-721f1da0ae

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-2c9f971c67

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
can-utils-20160229git-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8c1e55e18e

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050



--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla  ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/can-utils

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050

John W. Linville  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Assignee|linvi...@redhat.com |pmati...@redhat.com
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from John W. Linville  ---
OK, I'll accept that.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050

Panu Matilainen  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(pmatilai@redhat.c |
   |om) |



--- Comment #2 from Panu Matilainen  ---
> Minor issues -- fix the BuildRequires and I will approve it.
>
>  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc
>  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2

Actually fedora-review is wrong here. There used to be such an exception list,
but it was dropped in recently (last year or so) to make buildroots more
minimal. See https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/497 and
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/497, in particular
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/497#comment:21

I'll have a look at the warnings and fix what makes sense (spelling etc)
though.

-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050

John W. Linville  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||pmati...@redhat.com
  Flags||needinfo?(pmatilai@redhat.c
   ||om)



--- Comment #1 from John W. Linville  ---
Minor issues -- fix the BuildRequires and I will approve it.

Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
  are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
  Note: These BR are not needed: gcc
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- Two SHOULD items fail (due to lack of upstream support).  These do not
  have to be fixed for this review.
- Rpmlint warnings are overzealous/pedantic and not significant.


= 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 (v2 or later)", "BSD (3 clause) GPL (v2)", "Unknown or
 generated", "BSD (3 clause) GPL (unversioned/unknown version)", "*No
 copyright* BSD (3 clause) GPL (unversioned/unknown version)", "GPL (v2
 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)". 4 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/1327050-can-
 utils/licensecheck.txt
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
 must be documented in the spec.
[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.
[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 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

= SHOULD items =

[Bug 1327050] Review Request: can-utils - SocketCAN userspace utilities and tools

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1327050

John W. Linville  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||linvi...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|linvi...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



-- 
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org