[Bug 1670656] Review Request: grafana - an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard and graph editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670656 --- Comment #5 from Mark Goodwin --- All changes mentioned in Comment #4 are done, bumped to grafana-5.4.3-4. Note new GH branch 'fedora-spec-build'. The %post scriptlet has been reduced to the bare minimum, as discussed. Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/goodwinos/grafana/fedora-spec-build/packaging/rpm/spec/grafana.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~mgoodwin/grafana/grafana-5.4.3-4.fc28.src.rpm COPR URL: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mgoodwin/grafana/ -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663710] Review Request: golang-github-exoscale-egoscale - A wrapper for the Exoscale public cloud API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663710 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-exoscale-egoscale-0.13.2-1.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1663710] Review Request: golang-github-exoscale-egoscale - A wrapper for the Exoscale public cloud API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1663710 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System --- golang-github-exoscale-egoscale-0.13.2-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1665480] Review Request: mantle - Collection of tools for managing cloud images.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1665480 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- mantle-0-0.1.git490b74e.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1291353] Review Request: nodejs-builtin-modules - List of the Node.js builtin modules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1291353 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- nodejs-builtin-modules-1.1.0-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1266594] Review Request: playerctl - Command-line MPRIS-compatible Media Player Controller
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1266594 Justin W. Flory changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jflo...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Justin W. Flory --- Hi, I opened bug 1671571 [1] with a new package request for playerctl. Then I noticed this bug is already open. I successfully built playerctl in COPR [2] and Koji. You can use and install playerctl on Fedora with the COPR repositories for Fedora 28 or later. -- [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671571 [2] https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jflory7/playerctl/ -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671571] New: Review Request: playerctl - MPRIS command-line controller and library for spotify, vlc, audacious, bmp, cmus, and others
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671571 Bug ID: 1671571 Summary: Review Request: playerctl - MPRIS command-line controller and library for spotify, vlc, audacious, bmp, cmus, and others Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: low Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jflo...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- External Bug ID: Red Hat Bugzilla 1266594 Classification: Fedora This is my third package and I am seeking a sponsor. * Spec URL: https://pagure.io/jflory7-rpm-specs/blob/master/f/rpmbuild/SPECS/playerctl.spec * SRPM URL: https://pagure.io/jflory7-rpm-specs/blob/master/f/rpmbuild/SRPMS/playerctl-2.0.1-1.fc29.src.rpm * Description: Playerctl is a command-line utility and library for controlling media players that implement the MPRIS D-Bus Interface Specification. Playerctl makes it easy to bind player actions, such as play and pause, to media keys. You can also get metadata about the playing track such as the artist and title for integration into statusline generators or other command-line tools. (https://github.com/acrisci/playerctl). * Fedora Account System Username: jflory7 This package is also hosted in COPR and was built in Koji on F28, F29, and Rawhide. * https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jflory7/playerctl/ * F30: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32392575 * F29: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32392582 * F28: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32392592 -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1670656] Review Request: grafana - an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard and graph editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670656
--- Comment #4 from Mark Goodwin ---
(In reply to Xavier Bachelot from comment #3)
> Thanks for the update Mark.
> Here's a couple more comments:
thanks, much appreciated
>
> - Seems Summary is not actually fixed:
> Summary: Grafana is an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard
> and graph editor
> s/Grafana is an open source, feature rich m/M/
oh, I thought you ment in this BZ summary (Doh!). I'll fix it in the spec too.
>
> - When installing files, use install -p to preserve timestamps.
>
> - Some of the %attr are useless in %files. All of them that force the
> owner/group to root/root are redundant with the default %defattr and those
> that also force the perms are also redundant with the install calls.
ok
> Remove the %attr in the following lines:
> %attr(0755, root, root) %{_sbindir}/%{name}-server
> %attr(0755, root, root) %{_sbindir}/%{name}-cli
> %config(noreplace) %attr(-, root, root)
> %{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/grafana-server
> %config(noreplace) %attr(-, root, root) %{_unitdir}/grafana-server.service
> %attr(-, root, root) %doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/*.md
> %attr(-, root, root) %doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/VERSION
ok will do
>
> - The systemd unit file should not be %config(noreplace). Sorry if I did
> make change you that the other way with my earlier comment.
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Systemd/#_packaging
will fix that up
>
> - Rather than use an %exclude in %files, rm the unneeded docs dir in %install
> %exclude %{_datadir}/%{name}/docs
ok. Might also consider a subpackage for grafana-docs. And will need a man page
for grafana-server(1) and grafana-cli(1)
>
> - %files is missing a %license. The license file might be installed
> elsewhere, I haven't looked, but it should be marked as such.
ok will investigate that and add as appropriate
>
> (In reply to Mark Goodwin from comment #2)
> > >
> > > %post could probably use some systemd macros to be made simpler.
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#Scriptlets
> > >
> > > Generally speaking, %post and %posttrans looks quite complicated and
> > > doing too much. Maybe that could be made simpler ?
> > >
> >
> > these scriptlets are actually taken directly from grafana source
> > See packaging/rpm/control/{postinst,posttrans}. So I'd need to
> > discuss upstream before changing them.
> >
> I understand and if the Fedora review can benefit upstream package too, I'm
> sure none would complain :-)
really, all %post should need is: systemctl condrestart grafana-server
(so it's restarted ONLY if it's already running). And the user/group creation.
However, since current grafana.com RPMs have the config DB in
/usr/share/grafana/data
we might want to migrate that to it's new location in /var/lib/grafana/data
or this could be left for a sysadmin to tackle.
>
> Anyway, let's start looking at what's in there. I think that's the part of
> the specfile that need the more work.
yep
>
> It's not silent, and scriptlets are supposed to be.
> It checks for files that the rpm deploys and override them with saved config
> files, which voids the purpose of %config(noreplace).
yep agree - shouldn't be necessary with correct config(noreplace)
> It changes owner/group and perms on files that already have been properly
> set in the rpm.
agree, shouldn't need to do that either
> I might be missing something, but it seems part useless and part dangerous
> to me.
>
> I won't detail %post for now, but it seems to suffer from the same
> symptoms(set owner/group/perms, install conf file that are/should be
> deployed by the rpm).
> Enabling services on rpm install is also probably wrong.
against fedora and rhel policy
> Again, unless I'm missing something, the only parts that should be kept are
> the grafana user and group creation and the conditional restart of the
> service on upgrade.
yep - I'll work through that and post a new update later today (I'm in
Australia TZ)
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/UsersAndGroups/
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/DefaultServices/
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/
> #_systemd
Cheers
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1670999] Review Request: erlang-corba - Erlang CORBA libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670999 --- Comment #2 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/erlang-corba -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1662526] Review Request: neuron - A flexible and powerful simulator of neurons and networks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662526 --- Comment #8 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Updated spec/srpm: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/neuron/neuron.spec https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/neuron/neuron-7.5-4.20181214git5687519.fc29.src.rpm * Thu Jan 31 2019 Ankur Sinha - 7.5-4.20181214git5687519 - Remove libtool archives - Remove stray comment - Improve previous changelog I'm already in conversation with upstream about multiple issues (arch support/sundials/libstdc++) so I'll bring up the build issue there too. I don't want to pepper them with too many issues all at once. Cheers, Ankur -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671540] New: Review Request: rust-fake-simd - Crate for mimicking simd crate on stable Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671540 Bug ID: 1671540 Summary: Review Request: rust-fake-simd - Crate for mimicking simd crate on stable Rust Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: rbar...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bowlofeggs/ybaas/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00852630-rust-fake-simd/rust-fake-simd.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bowlofeggs/ybaas/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00852630-rust-fake-simd/rust-fake-simd-0.1.2-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: Crate for mimicking simd crate on stable Rust Fedora Account System Username: bowlofeggs -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1662565] Review Request: libsignal-protocol-c - Signal Protocol C library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662565
--- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov ---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is almost silent:
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SPECS: rpmlint
../SRPMS/libsignal-protocol-c-2.3.2-1.fc29.src.rpm
../RPMS/x86_64/libsignal-protocol-c-*
libsignal-protocol-c.src: E: description-line-too-long C This is a ratcheting
forward secrecy protocol that works in synchronous and asynchronous messaging
libsignal-protocol-c.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C This is a
ratcheting forward secrecy protocol that works in synchronous and asynchronous
messaging
^^^ These two looks cosmetic. But anyway consider shortening it.
libsignal-protocol-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
^^^ It does not contain any docs.
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings.
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SPECS:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (GPLv3
exactly).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
as %license.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum libsignal-protocol-c-2.3.2.tar.gz*
f3826f3045352e14027611c95449bfcfe39bfd3d093d578c70f70eee0c85000d
libsignal-protocol-c-2.3.2.tar.gz
f3826f3045352e14027611c95449bfcfe39bfd3d093d578c70f70eee0c85000d
libsignal-protocol-c-2.3.2.tar.gz.1
Auriga ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
+/- The package bundle copies of system libraries (protobuf compiler and
curve25519 library, which isn't included in Fedora repos yet). A necessary
provides is added.
0 The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
+ Header files are stored in a -devel package.
0 No static libraries.
+ The pkgconfig(.pc) files are stored in a -devel package and necessary runtime
requirement added automatically.
+ The library file(s) that end in .so (without suffix) is(are) stored in a
-devel package.
+ The -devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned
dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
APPROVED.
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1662565] Review Request: libsignal-protocol-c - Signal Protocol C library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662565 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1662565] Review Request: libsignal-protocol-c - Signal Protocol C library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662565 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lemen...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Flags|needinfo?(bugs.michael@gmx. |fedora-review? |net)| --- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov --- I'll review it -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671064] Review Request: libldac - LDAC library from AOSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671064 --- Comment #2 from Gergely Gombos --- Thank you! For legal review: There's a NOTICE file in the source that says: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/external/libldac/+/master/NOTICE Taking the certification process is required to use LDAC in your products. For the detail of certification process, see the following URL: https://www.sony.net/Products/LDAC/aosp/ -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671450] New: Review Request: golang-github-thorduri-libusb - Idiomatic Go bindings for libusb-1.0
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671450 Bug ID: 1671450 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-thorduri-libusb - Idiomatic Go bindings for libusb-1.0 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jje...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jjelen.fedorapeople.org/golang-github-thorduri-go-libusb.spec SRPM URL: https://jjelen.fedorapeople.org/golang-github-thorduri-libusb-0-0.1.20190131gitbbed4ca.fc30.src.rpm Description: The gousb package is an attempt at wrapping the libusb library into a Go-like binding. Fedora Account System Username: jjelen -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671234] Review Request: mpris-scrobbler - User daemon to submit currently playing song to LastFM, LibreFM, ListenBrainz
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671234 --- Comment #4 from Justin W. Flory --- Oh, also, I built the changes in Koji for f30 and epel7, and I currently have a Copr build pending: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32354678 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32369473 https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jflory7/mpris-scrobbler/build/852635/ -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671234] Review Request: mpris-scrobbler - User daemon to submit currently playing song to LastFM, LibreFM, ListenBrainz
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671234 --- Comment #3 from Justin W. Flory --- Thanks for the help, Igor. I pushed this new commit to address your feedback: https://pagure.io/jflory7-rpm-specs/c/dc2a6dd39caf67030bb116262a40adcc670a7b2d?branch=master Is there anything else worth doing before requesting a new dist-git repo? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1669804] Review Request: rust-headers-core - Typed HTTP headers core trait
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669804 Igor Gnatenko changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rbar...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Igor Gnatenko --- *** Bug 1671365 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671365] Review Request: rust-headers-core - typed HTTP headers core trait
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671365 Igor Gnatenko changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2019-01-31 13:36:18 --- Comment #1 from Igor Gnatenko --- It is already packaged =( *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1669804 *** -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671365] New: Review Request: rust-headers-core - typed HTTP headers core trait
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671365 Bug ID: 1671365 Summary: Review Request: rust-headers-core - typed HTTP headers core trait Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: rbar...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/rust-headers-core.spec SRPM URL: https://bowlofeggs.fedorapeople.org/rust-headers-core-0.1.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: typed HTTP headers core trait Fedora Account System Username: bowlofeggs -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671234] Review Request: mpris-scrobbler - User daemon to submit currently playing song to LastFM, LibreFM, ListenBrainz
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671234
Igor Gnatenko changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||i.gnatenko.br...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Igor Gnatenko ---
--- mpris-scrobbler.spec~ 2019-01-31 14:26:20.002065328 +0100
+++ mpris-scrobbler.spec2019-01-31 14:29:44.673263100 +0100
@@ -7,19 +7,17 @@
URL:https://github.com/mariusor/mpris-scrobbler
Source0:%{url}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
-BuildRequires: cmake
-BuildRequires: dbus dbus-devel
-BuildRequires: expat expat-devel
+BuildRequires: meson
BuildRequires: gcc
-BuildRequires: json-c json-c-devel
-BuildRequires: libcurl libcurl-devel
-BuildRequires: libevent libevent-devel
-BuildRequires: m4 make
-BuildRequires: meson ninja-build
-BuildRequires: openssl openssl-devel
-BuildRequires: scdoc
+BuildRequires: pkgconfig(dbus-1)
+BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libcurl)
+BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libevent)
+BuildRequires: pkgconfig(json-c)
+BuildRequires: /usr/bin/m4
+BuildRequires: /usr/bin/scdoc
+BuildRequires: systemd-rpm-macros
-Requires: xdg-utils
+Requires: /usr/bin/xdg-open
%description
@@ -47,13 +45,12 @@
%files
-%doc %{_mandir}/man1/mpris-scrobbler.1.gz
-%doc %{_mandir}/man5/mpris-scrobbler-credentials.5.gz
-%doc %{_mandir}/man1/mpris-scrobbler-signon.1.gz
%license LICENSE
%{_bindir}/%{name}
%{_bindir}/%{name}-signon
-/usr/lib/systemd/user/%{name}.service
+%{_mandir}/man1/mpris-scrobbler{,-signon}.1*
+%{_mandir}/man5/mpris-scrobbler-credentials.5*
+%{_userunitdir}/%{name}.service
%changelog
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1670999] Review Request: erlang-corba - Erlang CORBA libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670999
Randy Barlow changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Randy Barlow ---
Summary of things to fix before importing to Fedora:
* Ensure the package installs (fedora-review said it doesn't, but fedora-review
often doesn't work right lately…)
* Add a -devel package to contain the header files.
* Move the static files to the devel package as well.
Everything else noted below is at your option.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
- Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: erlang-ic : /usr/lib64/erlang/lib/ic-4.5.2/include/ic.h erlang-ic :
/usr/lib64/erlang/usr/include/ic.h
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages
- 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
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
present.
Note: Package has .a files: erlang-ic. Illegal package name: erlang-ic.
Does not provide -static: erlang-ic.
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries
- Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#macros
- This seems like a Java package, please install fedora-review-plugin-java
to get additional checks
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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: "*No copyright* Apache License (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated",
"Apache License (v2.0)". 193 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/vagrant/1670999-erlang-
corba/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.
[-]: 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]: 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 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
[Bug 1671273] Review Request: python-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671273 Miro Hrončok changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Miro Hrončok --- CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 99f79b71e9df7aaab86ff873ecb269e4be7cb08ff1732c5f3a11510a2dcefc12 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 99f79b71e9df7aaab86ff873ecb269e4be7cb08ff1732c5f3a11510a2dcefc12 License looks good. Requirements look good. Checking: python3-flask-cors-3.0.7-1.fc30.noarch.rpm python-flask-cors-3.0.7-1.fc30.src.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Enjoy your package, it's APPROVED. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1662526] Review Request: neuron - A flexible and powerful simulator of neurons and networks
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662526
--- Comment #7 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski ---
(In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #6)
> (In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #5)
[...]
> > 1. I read your comment at the top of the spec:
> > > # This is a serial build of NEURON without Python or other bindings.
> > > # Both the MPI builds and Python bindings require NEURON to be already
> > > # installed in the system---they are build as post-installation hooks.
> > > So, we
> > > # first package a serial version of NEURON and then package those
> > > separately
> > > # after using this package as a BR
> >
> > Are you sure this is really the case? Looking at src/nrnmpi/Makefile.am,
> > it seems that specifying the path to the just-built libraries should suffice
> > to build it after the serial version is built.
>
> I did try that, but I wasn't able to get it to work. nrnmpi depends on other
> bits that are not in subdirs of the nrnmpi directory. So, the dep chain
> isn't set up correctly. From what I could find, there's a way to force the
> dependent targets that are not in subdirs. (The other alternative is to drop
> the subdir method of using Autotools and re-do the project.) So, it seems
> that this why upstream build nrnmpi in the post-install hook (and not
> post-build).
Alright. Could you open a ticket with upstream about this, too? It would be
better if MPI variants could be built in the same build process.
[...]
> > 3. The header file in -devel subpackage:
> > # should this be here?!
> > %{_libdir}/nrnconf.h
> >
> > It shouldn't. Please put it in %{_includedir} .
>
> Moved.
You seem to have left the comment which is no longer relevant.
> > 4. It looks like there's more bundled code:
> > src/gnu - libstdc++-devel (?)
> > src/readline - readline-devel
>
> Unfortunately it seems to be a version from 1988(!), and libstdc++ has
> changed so much since then that I cannot even find the bundled headers. I've
> filed a ticket upstream. For the time being, though, I've included it.
> Upstream changed the soname, so it won't conflict with the upstream version
> we provide in Fedora.
OK, thanks for opening the upstream ticket.
[...]
> > 6. README.md isn't very useful for the installed package as it talks only
> >about installing from source.
>
> Removed.
Good, but the changelog entry doesn't explain why you did it, which might be
useful.
> Updated spec/srpm:
> https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/neuron/neuron.spec
# Do we need the static libraries?
%files static
%license Copyright
%doc README.md
%{_libdir}/libivoc.la
%{_libdir}/libmemacs.la
%{_libdir}/libmeschach.la
%{_libdir}/libneuron_gnu.la
%{_libdir}/libnrniv.la
%{_libdir}/libnrnmpi.la
%{_libdir}/libnrnoc.la
%{_libdir}/liboc.la
%{_libdir}/libocxt.la
%{_libdir}/libsparse13.la
%{_libdir}/libscopmath.la
%{_libdir}/libivos.la
If it's just .la (libtool archive), then these are not enough, you should have
.a files as well. So either ship those, too or don't ship .la files at all
unless they're dlopened by neuron consumers.
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1669793] Review Request: python-vpoller - Distributed vSphere API Proxy
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1669793
Hirotaka Wakabayashi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hiw...@yahoo.com
--- Comment #2 from Hirotaka Wakabayashi ---
Hello, this is an unofficial review. Please read it for your reference.
Summary
===
1. rpmbuild error
2. rpmlint result
3. License
4. Others
Details
===
1. rpmbuild error
-
The 'sphinx-build' command, which is provided by python2-sphinx, is required
in "make -O -C docs html". sphinx-build-3 should be used in this case.
2. rpmlint on the binary rpm
-
rpmlint on the binary rpm package in my environment(fc29) reports errors and
warnings.
* spelling-error warnings are not problems.
* wrong-script-interpreter errors can be problems when users manually install
them. Here is the guideline.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_shebang_lines
* hidden-file-or-dir warning should be fixed if the hidden file is no use for
users.
* no-manual-page-for-binary should be fixed. Here is the guideline. You might
know that help2man is a useful tool.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_manpages
::
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) vSphere -> v
Sphere, sphere
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US vSphere -> v
Sphere, sphere
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/contrib/zabbix/externalscripts/cvpoller-zabbix
/usr/bin/env bash
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/contrib/zabbix/externalscripts/vpoller-zabbix
/usr/bin/env bash
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/extra/misc-tools/bootstrap-vpoller.sh
/usr/bin/env sh
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/extra/misc-tools/request-simulator.sh
/usr/bin/env bash
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/extra/zabbix/externalscripts/cvpoller-zabbix
/usr/bin/env sh
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/extra/zabbix/externalscripts/cvpoller-zabbix-vm-disk-get
/usr/bin/env sh
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/extra/zabbix/externalscripts/vpoller-zabbix
/usr/bin/env sh
python3-vpoller.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/extra/zabbix/vsphere-import/zabbix-vsphere-import
/usr/bin/env python
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/html/.buildinfo
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/html/objects.inv
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: file-not-utf8
/usr/share/doc/python3-vpoller/html/objects.inv
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary vpoller-client
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary vpoller-proxy
python3-vpoller.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary vpoller-worker
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 8 warnings.
3. License
---
py-vpoller is licensed under the BSD License, but are files in contrib dir and
extra also licensed under the BSD License? If not clear, it is always
preferred to ask upstream. See the following guideline.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_clarification
4. Others
-
Fedora guideline recommends putting "python_enable_dependency_generator" just
before the main package’s %description declaration.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_automatically_generated_dependencies
You can use the %{py_dist_name} macro that simply transforms any standardized
name to the canonical format.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_requires_and_buildrequires_with_standardized_names
For example::
> BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-docopt
> BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-zmq
> BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-vconnector
> BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-pyvmomi
> BuildRequires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-sphinx
could be::
> BuildRequires: %{py3_dist docopt zmq vconnector pyvmomi sphinx}
Thanks in advance,
Hirotaka Wakabayashi
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines:
[Bug 1670999] Review Request: erlang-corba - Erlang CORBA libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670999 Randy Barlow changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||rbar...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rbar...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671273] Review Request: python-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671273
--- Comment #3 from Miro Hrončok ---
BuildRequires: python3-setuptools
BuildRequires: %{py3_dist flask six nose}
This is kinda inconsistent with each other, but I don't really care.
Let me build the package once more and run some automated checks.
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671273] Review Request: python-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671273
--- Comment #2 from František Zatloukal ---
SPEC:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/flask-cors/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00852187-python-flask-cors/python-flask-cors.spec
SRPM:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/flask-cors/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00852187-python-flask-cors/python-flask-cors-3.0.7-1.fc30.src.rpm
All should be fixed. As for the weird {%py3_build} macros, I've probably
overlooked them in the original spec file.
Thanks!
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671273] Review Request: python-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671273
Miro Hrončok changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mhron...@redhat.com
Flags||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Miro Hrončok ---
https://github.com/corydolphin/%{srcname}/archive/%{version}.tar.gz#/%{srcname}-%{version}.tar.gz
github knows this:
https://github.com/corydolphin/%{srcname}/archive/%{version}/%{srcname}-%{version}.tar.gz
you could also use:
%{url}/archive/%{version}/%{srcname}-%{version}.tar.gz
Requires: %{py3_dist flask six}
There are automatic requires, drop this.
If you target anything but rawhide, enable this manually via
%{?python_enable_dependency_generator}.
---
Package uses setuptools. BuildRequire python3-setuptools explicitly.
---
Use the python_provide macro as mentioned in the Python packaging guidelines
---
I've never seen {%py3_build} only %{py3_build} or %py3_build - is this some
style of yours?
It evals to:
{\
CFLAGS="${CFLAGS:-${RPM_OPT_FLAGS}}" LDFLAGS="${LDFLAGS:-${RPM_LD_FLAGS}}"\
/usr/bin/python3 setup.py build --executable="/usr/bin/python3 -s"
sleep 1
}
So the commands are grouped via {}. I don't think this was intentional.
The same for %py3_install.
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1670656] Review Request: grafana - an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard and graph editor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670656
--- Comment #3 from Xavier Bachelot ---
Thanks for the update Mark.
Here's a couple more comments:
- Seems Summary is not actually fixed:
Summary: Grafana is an open source, feature rich metrics dashboard and
graph editor
s/Grafana is an open source, feature rich m/M/
- When installing files, use install -p to preserve timestamps.
- Some of the %attr are useless in %files. All of them that force the
owner/group to root/root are redundant with the default %defattr and those that
also force the perms are also redundant with the install calls.
Remove the %attr in the following lines:
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_sbindir}/%{name}-server
%attr(0755, root, root) %{_sbindir}/%{name}-cli
%config(noreplace) %attr(-, root, root) %{_sysconfdir}/sysconfig/grafana-server
%config(noreplace) %attr(-, root, root) %{_unitdir}/grafana-server.service
%attr(-, root, root) %doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/*.md
%attr(-, root, root) %doc %{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/VERSION
- The systemd unit file should not be %config(noreplace). Sorry if I did make
change you that the other way with my earlier comment.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Systemd/#_packaging
- Rather than use an %exclude in %files, rm the unneeded docs dir in %install
%exclude %{_datadir}/%{name}/docs
- %files is missing a %license. The license file might be installed elsewhere,
I haven't looked, but it should be marked as such.
(In reply to Mark Goodwin from comment #2)
> >
> > %post could probably use some systemd macros to be made simpler.
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#Scriptlets
> >
> > Generally speaking, %post and %posttrans looks quite complicated and doing
> > too much. Maybe that could be made simpler ?
> >
>
> these scriptlets are actually taken directly from grafana source
> See packaging/rpm/control/{postinst,posttrans}. So I'd need to
> discuss upstream before changing them.
>
I understand and if the Fedora review can benefit upstream package too, I'm
sure none would complain :-)
Anyway, let's start looking at what's in there. I think that's the part of the
specfile that need the more work.
%posttrans
#!/bin/sh
set -e
echo "POSTTRANS: Running script"
[ -f /etc/sysconfig/grafana-server ] && . /etc/sysconfig/grafana-server
# copy config files if missing
if [ ! -f /etc/grafana/grafana.ini ]; then
echo "POSTTRANS: Config file not found"
if [ -f /etc/grafana/grafana.ini.rpmsave ]; then
echo "POSTTRANS: /etc/grafana/grafana.ini.rpmsave config file found."
mv /etc/grafana/grafana.ini.rpmsave /etc/grafana/grafana.ini
echo "POSTTRANS: /etc/grafana/grafana.ini restored"
if [ -f /etc/grafana/ldap.toml.rpmsave ]; then
echo "POSTTRANS: /etc/grafana/ldap.toml.rpmsave found"
mv /etc/grafana/ldap.toml.rpmsave /etc/grafana/ldap.toml
echo "POSTTRANS: /etc/grafana/ldap.toml restored"
fi
echo "POSTTRANS: Restoring config file permissions"
chown -Rh root:$GRAFANA_GROUP /etc/grafana/*
chmod 755 /etc/grafana
find /etc/grafana -type f -exec chmod 640 {} ';'
find /etc/grafana -type d -exec chmod 755 {} ';'
fi
chown $GRAFANA_USER /usr/share/grafana/data
chmod 755 /usr/share/grafana/data
fi
It's not silent, and scriptlets are supposed to be.
It checks for files that the rpm deploys and override them with saved config
files, which voids the purpose of %config(noreplace).
It changes owner/group and perms on files that already have been properly set
in the rpm.
I might be missing something, but it seems part useless and part dangerous to
me.
I won't detail %post for now, but it seems to suffer from the same symptoms(set
owner/group/perms, install conf file that are/should be deployed by the rpm).
Enabling services on rpm install is also probably wrong.
Again, unless I'm missing something, the only parts that should be kept are the
grafana user and group creation and the conditional restart of the service on
upgrade.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/UsersAndGroups/
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/DefaultServices/
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_systemd
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512226] Review Request: python3-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512226 --- Comment #14 from František Zatloukal --- New Review Request was created: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671273 David, thanks for your work on initial packaging. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1671273] New: Review Request: python-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1671273 Bug ID: 1671273 Summary: Review Request: python-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask Product: Fedora Version: 29 Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fzatl...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/flask-cors/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00852170-python-flask-cors/python-flask-cors.spec SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/frantisekz/flask-cors/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00852170-python-flask-cors/python-flask-cors-3.0.7-1.fc30.src.rpm This is resurrection of dead package review: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512226 No significant changes were made, it was just updated to the latest release. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512226] Review Request: python3-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512226 --- Comment #13 from Miro Hrončok --- Make sure to name the source package python-flask-cors and feel free to CC me on the review request, I'll try to review it promptly. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1512226] Review Request: python3-flask-cors - Cross Origin Resource Sharing ( CORS ) support for Flask
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1512226 František Zatloukal changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |NOTABUG Flags|fedora-review? | Last Closed||2019-01-31 09:31:51 --- Comment #12 from František Zatloukal --- Closing since there is no reply from original submitter as per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews . I'll create new review request for this soon. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
