https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1794971 Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |decathorpe(a)gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Is this a rename of the existing mscore package? -- 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=1794971 Michel Alexandre Salim <michel(a)michel-slm.name&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |michel(a)michel-slm.name Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel(a)michel-slm.name&gt; --- Looks mostly fine. APPROVED. Would appreciate a swap with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1804529 (but only if you have time) Some nits: - 3.4.2 is out, you can update when importing - not sure where exactly the CC-BY files are contained. If they are indeed used in the -doc subpackage, this file might need to be added to -doc's %license or %doc (since technically it's not really a license but a license declaration for some files): mscore/data/icons/LICENSE.md Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [?]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [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]: 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. [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. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [?]: 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. [x]: 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 20480 bytes in 4 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 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. MuseScore 3.4.2 is released, please update [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_use_rpmlint [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 71956480 bytes in /usr/share musescore-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm:71956480 See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_... [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.4.21 starting (python version = 3.7.6)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins INFO: Signal handler active Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 1.4.21 INFO: Mock Version: 1.4.21 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-debugsource-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-doc-3.4.1-1.fc31.noarch.rpm /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-debuginfo-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm ERROR: Command failed: # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-31-x86_64-musescore/root/ --releasever 31 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk install /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-debugsource-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-doc-3.4.1-1.fc31.noarch.rpm /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1794971-musescore/results/musescore-debuginfo-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: musescore-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm musescore-doc-3.4.1-1.fc31.noarch.rpm musescore-debuginfo-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm musescore-debugsource-3.4.1-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm musescore-3.4.1-1.fc31.src.rpm musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/musescore/COPYING.LESSER.rtf2html musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/plugins/abc_import.qml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/plugins/run.qml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/cchords_muse.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/cchords_nrb.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/cchords_rb.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/cchords_sym.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/chords.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/chords_jazz.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/chords_std.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/jazzchords.xml musescore.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/mscore-3.4/styles/stdchords.xml musescore.src:87: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(intervaltree) musescore.src:274: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 13 errors, 1 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore/releases/download/v3.4.1/MuseScore... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 10f660af4fec77f9564a4c54c629d6314899a01b240ff5352b5ffb2fcb34ed21 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 10f660af4fec77f9564a4c54c629d6314899a01b240ff5352b5ffb2fcb34ed21 Requires -------- musescore (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gnu-free-sans-fonts gnu-free-serif-fonts hicolor-icon-theme libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.13)(64bit) libQt5Gui.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Gui.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Help.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Help.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Network.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Network.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5PrintSupport.so.5()(64bit) libQt5PrintSupport.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Qml.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Qml.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Quick.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Quick.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Solutions_SingleApplication-2.6.so.1()(64bit) libQt5Svg.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Svg.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5()(64bit) libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5WebEngineWidgets.so.5()(64bit) libQt5WebEngineWidgets.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Widgets.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Widgets.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Xml.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Xml.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5XmlPatterns.so.5()(64bit) libQt5XmlPatterns.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libasound.so.2()(64bit) libasound.so.2(ALSA_0.9)(64bit) libasound.so.2(ALSA_0.9.0rc4)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpoppler-qt5.so.1()(64bit) libportaudio.so.2()(64bit) libportmidi.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libpulse.so.0()(64bit) libpulse.so.0(PULSE_0)(64bit) libsndfile.so.1()(64bit) libsndfile.so.1(libsndfile.so.1.0)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.1)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) libvorbisfile.so.3()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) musescore-fonts qt5-qtbase(x86-64) qt5-qtquickcontrols2(x86-64) rtld(GNU_HASH) soundfont2 soundfont2-default steinberg-bravura-fonts steinberg-bravura-text-fonts musescore-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): musescore musescore-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): musescore-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- musescore: application() application(mscore.desktop) bundled(beatroot-vamp) bundled(intervaltree) bundled(rtf2html) metainfo() metainfo(org.musescore.MuseScore.appdata.xml) mimehandler(application/vnd.recordare.musicxml) mimehandler(application/vnd.recordare.musicxml+xml) mimehandler(application/x-musescore) mimehandler(application/x-musescore+xml) mimehandler(application/xml) mimehandler(audio/midi) mimehandler(text/x-lilypond) mscore musescore musescore(x86-64) musescore-doc: mscore-doc musescore-doc musescore-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) musescore-debuginfo musescore-debuginfo(x86-64) musescore-debugsource: musescore-debugsource musescore-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.4 (54fa030) last change: 2019-12-07 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1794971 -m fedora-31-x86_64 -o --uniqueext musescore Buildroot used: fedora-31-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, C/C++ Disabled plugins: R, Python, fonts, PHP, Java, Ocaml, Haskell, SugarActivity, Perl Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- 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=1794971 --- Comment #4 from Jerry James <loganjerry(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #3) Thank you, Michel! I appreciate the review. I hope I have not wasted your efforts, however. I am on the verge of abandoning the rename due to persistent font problems that can be traced directly back to the rename. I'll work with it a little more and see if I can resolve the issues, but if it looks like it's going to take a lot of work, I will probably not go forward with this. I will do it, but it may be a couple of days before I have time. That looks like an interesting package. -- 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=1794971 Michel Alexandre Salim <michel(a)michel-slm.name&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|michel(a)michel-slm.name |loganjerry(a)gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim <michel(a)michel-slm.name&gt; --- Jerry, reassigning to you to decide if you want to drop this -- 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