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


Issues:
=======
- Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
  in the spec URL.
  Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /var/lib/copr-
  rpmbuild/results/rust-lib0/diff.txt
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/


===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License". 17 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-
     rpmbuild/results/rust-lib0/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: %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.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: 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]: 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 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]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[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:
[!]: 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).
[ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in rust-
     lib0-devel , rust-lib0+default-devel , rust-lib0+lib0-serde-devel ,
     rust-lib0+serde-devel , rust-lib0+serde_json-devel
[ ]: 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:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Bad spec filename: /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/rust-
     lib0/srpm-unpacked/rust-lib0.spec
     See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: rust-lib0-devel-0.12.2-1.fc38.noarch.rpm
          rust-lib0+default-devel-0.12.2-1.fc38.noarch.rpm
          rust-lib0+lib0-serde-devel-0.12.2-1.fc38.noarch.rpm
          rust-lib0+serde-devel-0.12.2-1.fc38.noarch.rpm
          rust-lib0+serde_json-devel-0.12.2-1.fc38.noarch.rpm
          rust-lib0-0.12.2-1.fc38.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/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/tmpzaqkmizm')]
checks: 31, packages: 6

rust-lib0+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0+lib0-serde-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0+serde-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0+serde_json-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0-devel.noarch: E: files-duplicated-waste 154691
rust-lib0-devel.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/licenses/rust-lib0-devel/LICENSE /usr/share/cargo/registry/lib0-0.12.2/LICENSE
 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings, 1 badness; has taken 0.2 s 




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/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: 31, packages: 5

rust-lib0+serde-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0+serde_json-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0+lib0-serde-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-lib0-devel.noarch: E: files-duplicated-waste 154691
rust-lib0-devel.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/licenses/rust-lib0-devel/LICENSE /usr/share/cargo/registry/lib0-0.12.2/LICENSE
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings, 1 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/y-crdt/y-crdt/blob/main/LICENSE :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : c01414e4affff31246bfe5c8a2c5851364888e56069432839bd7543b9c14d3e8
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f1811cce5805b547f8ee9ce44c98a004e7038ccad2b1c645f74c9c3a45973cac
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/lib0/0.12.2/download#/lib0-0.12.2.crate :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 988e5aa573db0f1f3fe56b635484cd96a880afd102404250e4703738cda66c6b
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 988e5aa573db0f1f3fe56b635484cd96a880afd102404250e4703738cda66c6b
diff -r also reports differences


Requires
--------
rust-lib0-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(thiserror/default) >= 1.0.0 with crate(thiserror/default) < 2.0.0~)
    cargo

rust-lib0+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(lib0)

rust-lib0+lib0-serde-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(lib0)
    crate(lib0/serde)
    crate(lib0/serde_json)

rust-lib0+serde-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(serde) >= 1.0.0 with crate(serde) < 2.0.0~)
    cargo
    crate(lib0)

rust-lib0+serde_json-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(serde_json/default) >= 1.0.0 with crate(serde_json/default) < 2.0.0~)
    cargo
    crate(lib0)



Provides
--------
rust-lib0-devel:
    crate(lib0)
    rust-lib0-devel

rust-lib0+default-devel:
    crate(lib0/default)
    rust-lib0+default-devel

rust-lib0+lib0-serde-devel:
    crate(lib0/lib0-serde)
    rust-lib0+lib0-serde-devel

rust-lib0+serde-devel:
    crate(lib0/serde)
    rust-lib0+serde-devel

rust-lib0+serde_json-devel:
    crate(lib0/serde_json)
    rust-lib0+serde_json-devel



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name rust-lib0 --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: Ocaml, C/C++, PHP, Perl, Python, Haskell, Java, SugarActivity, fonts, R
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH