This is a review *template*. Besides handling the [ ]-marked tests you are also supposed to fix the template before pasting into bugzilla: - Add issues you find to the list of issues on top. If there isn't such a list, create one. - Add your own remarks to the template checks. - Add new lines marked [!] or [?] when you discover new things not listed by fedora-review. - Change or remove any text in the template which is plain wrong. In this case you could also file a bug against fedora-review - Remove the "[ ] Manual check required", you will not have any such lines in what you paste. - Remove attachments which you deem not really useful (the rpmlint ones are mandatory, though) - Remove this text Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [ ]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [ ]: 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: "MIT License", "Unknown or generated". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr- rpmbuild/results/nebula-overlay-networking/licensecheck.txt [ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [ ]: Changelog in prescribed format. [ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [ ]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: %defattr present but not needed [ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package [ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [ ]: Package does not generate any conflict. [ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [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]: No %config files under /usr. [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]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in nebula-overlay-networking [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 7743 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [ ]: Package functions as described. [ ]: Latest version is packaged. [ ]: 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. [ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: nebula-overlay-networking-1.9.3-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm nebula-overlay-networking-1.9.3-1.fc41.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp_txa9gjc')] checks: 32, packages: 2 nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/nebula nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/nebula-cert nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: E: statically-linked-binary /usr/bin/nebula nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: E: statically-linked-binary /usr/bin/nebula-cert nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: W: position-independent-executable-suggested /usr/bin/nebula nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: W: position-independent-executable-suggested /usr/bin/nebula-cert nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nebula nebula-overlay-networking.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nebula-cert nebula-overlay-networking.spec:61: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 61) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 7 warnings, 11 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.5 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 1 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s (none): E: there is no installed rpm "nebula-overlay-networking". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/slackhq/nebula/raw/v1.9.3/README.md : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : c64d7dfaee4a32e772610b7188c18a5705ef1a0ac244123cda1690d630f7c579 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c64d7dfaee4a32e772610b7188c18a5705ef1a0ac244123cda1690d630f7c579 https://github.com/slackhq/nebula/raw/v1.9.3/examples/service_scripts/nebula.service : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 085e5d62d8e52526b9b6bb84f969726602b3bf4c427c2d8ec65fc4a2d47dd41a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 085e5d62d8e52526b9b6bb84f969726602b3bf4c427c2d8ec65fc4a2d47dd41a https://github.com/slackhq/nebula/raw/v1.9.3/LICENSE : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : aefd0cce553f24945ce1c692c3c4f9fda581f078ba82977845715cd18565b3bd CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : aefd0cce553f24945ce1c692c3c4f9fda581f078ba82977845715cd18565b3bd https://github.com/slackhq/nebula/raw/v1.9.3/examples/config.yml : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2ec86002ed08c34e2868f05b14a4e3ccaecbdc92a60e49bc14d92c289b0af7a5 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2ec86002ed08c34e2868f05b14a4e3ccaecbdc92a60e49bc14d92c289b0af7a5 https://github.com/slackhq/nebula/releases/download/v1.9.3/nebula-linux-amd64.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3aa3dc989a50791602593f182e119e37e4bef6bc12bbc99a1c91ad2a046aaa60 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3aa3dc989a50791602593f182e119e37e4bef6bc12bbc99a1c91ad2a046aaa60 Requires -------- nebula-overlay-networking (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh config(nebula-overlay-networking) firewalld Provides -------- nebula-overlay-networking: config(nebula-overlay-networking) nebula-overlay-networking nebula-overlay-networking(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name nebula-overlay-networking --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-41-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Haskell, SugarActivity, Perl, R, PHP, C/C++, Java, Python, Ocaml, fonts Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH