https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1539831
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- Please add a comment above each patch to explain what they're for.
- Please consider providing an Appdata file. See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData
- You're distributing fonts with some licenses not mentioned in License:
*No copyright* Apache (v2.0)
nheko-96e99710fcc4ef5c24604f34029cc35f9737705a/resources/fonts/OpenSans/LICENSE.txt
CC by (v4.0)
nheko-96e99710fcc4ef5c24604f34029cc35f9737705a/resources/fonts/EmojiOne/emojione-android.ttf
Add them to the list and add them to the license breakdown comment.
- Where is gen_libs.sh? It should be included as a Source too if it used to
generate the tarball.
- The correct shorthand for Boost Software License is not "BSL 1.0" but
"Boost"
- You must add:
Requires: hicolor-icon-theme
to own the hicolor directories.
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]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "CC by (v4.0)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated",
"MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "BSL (v1.0)", "GPL (v2)", "*No copyright* Apache
(v2.0)". 278 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/nheko/review-
nheko/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners:
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256/apps,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/512x512/apps,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/512x512,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/256x256,
/usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32
[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.
[-]: 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 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]: 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 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]
