https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1328968
Andy Lutomirski <l...@kernel.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org |l...@kernel.org
Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #6 from Andy Lutomirski <l...@kernel.org> ---
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
One biggish issue: this installs unversioned .so files. More precisely, it
installs nonstandard versioned .so files. They look like:
SONAME libcapnp-0.5.3.so
This may be against the guidelines. It may also be fine. You could try
to convince me that it's fine, or you could ask FPC.
Also, see:
https://github.com/sandstorm-io/capnproto/issues/318
Issues:
=======
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
- All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: These BR are not needed: gcc-c++
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
===== MUST items =====
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
I think this is https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1330804, but
I'm not quite sure that this refers to.
[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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "BSD (3 clause)", "GPL (v2 or later)",
"Unknown or generated". 36 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: 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.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[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 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 separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
capnproto-libs , capnproto-devel , capnproto-debuginfo
This is fine: the autogenerated requires/provides will do the trick.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[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: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint
I think fedora-review is just confused.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
is arched.
Installation errors
-------------------
INFO: mock.py version 1.2.17 starting (python version = 3.4.3)...
Start: init plugins
INFO: selinux enabled
Finish: init plugins
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
Mock Version: 1.2.17
INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.17
Finish: chroot init
INFO: installing package(s):
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-libs-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-devel-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-debuginfo-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-debuginfo-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output.
# /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/
--releasever 25 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-libs-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-devel-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-debuginfo-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
/home/luto/devel/fedora/cnp/capnproto/results/capnproto-debuginfo-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
--setopt=tsflags=nocontexts
Rpmlint
-------
Checking: capnproto-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
capnproto-libs-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
capnproto-devel-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
capnproto-debuginfo-0.5.3-1.fc25.x86_64.rpm
capnproto-0.5.3-1.fc25.src.rpm
capnproto.x86_64: W: no-documentation
capnproto.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary capnpc-c++
capnproto.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary capnp
capnproto.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary capnpc-capnp
capnproto.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary capnpc
capnproto-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libkj-0.5.3.so
_exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
capnproto-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
capnproto-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
I filed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1330804 for this.
capnproto-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
capnproto-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/capnproto-c++-0.5.3/src/kj/miniposix.h
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.
Requires
--------
capnproto (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
capnproto-libs(x86-64)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libcapnp-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libcapnpc-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libkj-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
capnproto-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/usr/bin/pkg-config
capnproto-libs(x86-64)
pkgconfig(capnp)
capnproto-libs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
/sbin/ldconfig
ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libcapnp-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libkj-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libkj-async-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libm.so.6()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
capnproto-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides
--------
capnproto:
capnproto
capnproto(x86-64)
capnproto-devel:
capnproto-devel
capnproto-devel(x86-64)
pkgconfig(capnp)
pkgconfig(capnp-rpc)
capnproto-libs:
capnproto-libs
capnproto-libs(x86-64)
libcapnp-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libcapnp-rpc-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libcapnpc-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libkj-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
libkj-async-0.5.3.so()(64bit)
capnproto-debuginfo:
capnproto-debuginfo
capnproto-debuginfo(x86-64)
Unversioned so-files
--------------------
capnproto-libs: /usr/lib64/libcapnp-0.5.3.so
capnproto-libs: /usr/lib64/libcapnp-rpc-0.5.3.so
capnproto-libs: /usr/lib64/libcapnpc-0.5.3.so
capnproto-libs: /usr/lib64/libkj-0.5.3.so
capnproto-libs: /usr/lib64/libkj-async-0.5.3.so
Source checksums
----------------
https://capnproto.org/capnproto-c++-0.5.3.tar.gz :
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
cdb17c792493bdcd4a24bcd196eb09f70ee64c83a3eccb0bc6534ff560536afb
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
cdb17c792493bdcd4a24bcd196eb09f70ee64c83a3eccb0bc6534ff560536afb
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -r -n
/home/luto/rpmbuild/SRPMS/capnproto-0.5.3-1.fc23.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R,
PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
--
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
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
