[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED Last Closed||2023-10-29 01:19:55 --- Comment #13 from Orion Poplawski --- Checked in and build. Thank you for the review! -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c13 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/x2gokdrive -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c12 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 Jos de Kloe changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Jos de Kloe --- > I honestly have no idea where this comment is coming from. The package BRs > pkgconfig(openssl), which on rawhide brings in: > openssl-develx86_64 1:3.1.1-4.fc40fedora 2.6 M > Although the binaries don't require either of libcrypto or libssl so I'm not > entirely sure it's used, despite being checked for: > checking for openssl... yes > I see no evidence of openssl1.1-devel being involved. I agree, it seems not used. At least ldd does not show that libssl is loaded by the x2gokdrive executable. > According to https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-field/: > The spec file License tag consists of an enumeration of all licenses covering > any code or other material contained in the corresponding binary > RPM. This > enumeration must take the form of an SPDX license expression. No further > analysis as to the "effective" license should be done. Explanation accepted. >> -rpmspec complains about permissions of the source files. >> please fix this. >Fixed. Thanks. You addressed all my remarks, therefore this package is now approved. -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c11 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 --- Comment #10 from Orion Poplawski --- (In reply to Jos de Kloe from comment #9) > Issues: > === > - Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. > Note: openssl1.1-devel is deprecated, you must not depend on it. > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- > guidelines/deprecating-packages/ I honestly have no idea where this comment is coming from. The package BRs pkgconfig(openssl), which on rawhide brings in: openssl-develx86_64 1:3.1.1-4.fc40fedora 2.6 M Although the binaries don't require either of libcrypto or libssl so I'm not entirely sure it's used, despite being checked for: checking for openssl... yes I see no evidence of openssl1.1-devel being involved. > - License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > ==>the copyright file that you included describes GPL-2 and GPL-2+ > but the spec file gives GPL-3.0-or-later > You added a comment to explain, but if this package actually > uses a mixture of GPL-2, GPL-2+, and GPL-3+ > then maybe the license flag should be GPL-2.0-or-later ? According to https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-field/: The spec file License tag consists of an enumeration of all licenses covering any code or other material contained in the corresponding binary RPM. This enumeration must take the form of an SPDX license expression. No further analysis as to the "effective" license should be done. > -rpmspec complains about permissions of the source files. > please fix this. Fixed. -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c10 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421
--- Comment #9 from Jos de Kloe ---
Thanks for this updated version.
I have a few minor remarks.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
Note: openssl1.1-devel is deprecated, you must not depend on it.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/deprecating-packages/
==>note that in case upstream does not yet support a newer version
you can add a comment to explain, and if possible a link to
an upstream issue tracker to explain them that this is an issue.
- License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
==>the copyright file that you included describes GPL-2 and GPL-2+
but the spec file gives GPL-3.0-or-later
You added a comment to explain, but if this package actually
uses a mixture of GPL-2, GPL-2+, and GPL-3+
then maybe the license flag should be GPL-2.0-or-later ?
-rpmspec complains about permissions of the source files.
please fix this.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
Note: Sources not installed
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[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]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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. No licenses
found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[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 =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a se
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 Fedora Review Service changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://www.x2go.org --- Comment #8 from Fedora Review Service --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6563292 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2215421-x2gokdrive/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06563292-x2gokdrive/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string. -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c8 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 --- Comment #7 from Orion Poplawski --- Ah, yeah, I never really managed to get the tests to run properly. At this point I'm just making %check succeed. Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/x2gokdrive.spec SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/x2gokdrive-0.0.0.2-2.fc40.src.rpm -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c7 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 --- Comment #6 from Jos de Kloe --- Also inspecting manually the folders /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/.x2go/C-9/ and /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/.x2go/S-9/ after the failed build I do not see files named pid. -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c6 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421
--- Comment #5 from Jos de Kloe ---
Thanks for the update.
There is a typo in the SRPM URL, you are missing a dot between 2-2 and fc40.
But manually downloading
https://orion.fedorapeople.org/x2gokdrive-0.0.0.2-2.fc40.src.rpm works for me.
Unfortunately the build fails on my side with the following error in the %check
stage:
SEL:x2gokdriveselection.c:376,string_to_atom() The image/jpeg atom has ID 241
SEL:x2gokdriveselection.c:376,string_to_atom() The PIXMAP atom has ID 20
SEL:x2gokdriveselection.c:376,string_to_atom() The image/bmp atom has ID 242
++ cat '/builddir/.x2go/[CS]-9/pid'
cat: '/builddir/.x2go/[CS]-9/pid': No such file or directory
+ kill
kill: usage: kill [-s sigspec | -n signum | -sigspec] pid | jobspec ... or kill
-l [sigspec]
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.w7KkN4 (%check)
RPM build errors:
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.w7KkN4 (%check)
Child return code was: 1
EXCEPTION: [Error('Command failed: \n # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M
0c9c2b9d4c9b4fa680d40c794abd498d -D /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root -a
-u mockbuild --capability=cap_ipc_lock
--bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.gdz9xbt_:/etc/resolv.conf --bind=/dev/btrfs-control
--bind=/dev/mapper/control --bind=/dev/fuse --bind=/dev/loop-control
--bind=/dev/loop0 --bind=/dev/loop1 --bind=/dev/loop2 --bind=/dev/loop3
--bind=/dev/loop4 --bind=/dev/loop5 --bind=/dev/loop6 --bind=/dev/loop7
--bind=/dev/loop8 --bind=/dev/loop9 --bind=/dev/loop10 --bind=/dev/loop11
--console=pipe --setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash
--setenv=HOME=/builddir --setenv=HOSTNAME=mock
--setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin \'--setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf
"\\033]0;\\007"\' \'--setenv=PS1= \\s-\\v\\$ \'
--setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off bash --login -c \'/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb
--noclean --target x86_64 --nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/x2gokdrive.spec\'\n',
1)]
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line
93, in trace
result = func(*args, **kw)
^
File "/usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/mockbuild/util.py", line 597, in
do_with_status
raise exception.Error("Command failed: \n # %s\n%s" % (cmd_pretty(command,
env), output), child.returncode)
mockbuild.exception.Error: Command failed:
# /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 0c9c2b9d4c9b4fa680d40c794abd498d -D
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root -a -u mockbuild
--capability=cap_ipc_lock --bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.gdz9xbt_:/etc/resolv.conf
--bind=/dev/btrfs-control --bind=/dev/mapper/control --bind=/dev/fuse
--bind=/dev/loop-control --bind=/dev/loop0 --bind=/dev/loop1 --bind=/dev/loop2
--bind=/dev/loop3 --bind=/dev/loop4 --bind=/dev/loop5 --bind=/dev/loop6
--bind=/dev/loop7 --bind=/dev/loop8 --bind=/dev/loop9 --bind=/dev/loop10
--bind=/dev/loop11 --console=pipe --setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash
--setenv=HOME=/builddir --setenv=HOSTNAME=mock
--setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin '--setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf
"\033]0;\007"' '--setenv=PS1= \s-\v\$ '
--setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off bash --login -c '/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bb
--noclean --target x86_64 --nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/x2gokdrive.spec'
Mock Version: 5.2
--
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=2215421
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c5
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 --- Comment #4 from Orion Poplawski --- Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/x2gokdrive.spec SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/x2gokdrive-0.0.0.2-2fc40.src.rpm - Fix License tag and add upstream copyright file - Add %%check -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c4 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 --- Comment #3 from Jos de Kloe --- Currently the fedora-review tool fails to build this package and issues the following error: ERROR: 'Source1 file /home/user_to_make_rpms/reviews/2215421-x2gokdrive/srpm-unpacked/copyright is missing in src.rpm. Conditional source inclusion?' (logs in /home/user_to_make_rpms/.cache/fedora-review.log) Could you please add this copyright file to the srpm? -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c3 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 Jos de Kloe changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|josdek...@gmail.com -- 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=2215421 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 Jos de Kloe changed: What|Removed |Added CC||josdek...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Jos de Kloe --- Hi Orion, thanks for working on this. Here are a first few remarks from a preliminary review. Issues: === - Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. Note: openssl1.1-devel is deprecated, you must not depend on it. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/deprecating-packages/ - The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. Note: Not a valid SPDX expression 'GPL-2.0+'. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SPDX_Licenses_Phase_1 ==>probably should be: "GPL-2.0-or-later" --Note that I don't see a license file in the source package. so "the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it." Browsing through the files in the sources directory I see several references to GPL v3 or later. Where did you find that the actual license is GPM v2 or later? - why did you include the %description fields twice? - regarding the %check section and the difficulty to install the tools from user perspective see my remarks in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215420 -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c2 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Bug 2215421] Review Request: x2gokdrive - KDrive graphical server backend for X2GoServer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2215421 Orion Poplawski changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Orion Poplawski --- Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/x2gokdrive.spec SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/x2gokdrive-0.0.0.2-1.fc40.src.rpm -- 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=2215421 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202215421%23c1 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
