[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-12-24 22:20:52 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- rudiments-0.53-5.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- rudiments-0.53-5.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ea2cdb5b6b -- 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 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |MODIFIED -- 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 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- rudiments-0.53-5.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ea2cdb5b6b -- 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 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 David Muse changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Jens Lody changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@jenslody.de --- Comment #1 from Jens Lody --- The package does not build in fedora-review: commandline: fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1259002 error: /bin/sh ../libtool --mode=compile g++ -O2 -g -pipe -mtune=generic -pipe -Wall -Werror-D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -D__EXTENSIONS__ -I../ -I../include -DINCLUDE_INETCLIENT -DINCLUDE_INETSERVER -DINCLUDE_UNIXCLIENT -DINCLUDE_UNIXSERVER -c directory.cpp -o directory.lo libtool: compile: g++ -O2 -g -pipe -mtune=generic -pipe -Wall -Werror -D_REENTRANT -D_THREAD_SAFE -D__EXTENSIONS__ -I../ -I../include -DINCLUDE_INETCLIENT -DINCLUDE_INETSERVER -DINCLUDE_UNIXCLIENT -DINCLUDE_UNIXSERVER -c directory.cpp -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/directory.o directory.cpp:332:6: error: #error no mkdir or anything like it #error no mkdir or anything like it ^ directory.cpp:341:5: error: #error no mkdir or anything like it #error no mkdir or anything like it ^ directory.cpp: In static member function 'static bool directory::create(const char*, mode_t)': directory.cpp:344:1: error: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Werror=return-type] } ^ cc1plus: all warnings being treated as errors -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002
--- Comment #2 from Jens Lody ---
Besides this:
%clean can normally be removed,
rm -rf %buildroot is deprecated,
%defattr(-, root, root) also.
%{_datadir}/licenses/%{name} is unneeded as far as I know.
The descriptions just repeats the summary, is it possible to be more
elaborately.
--
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002
--- Comment #3 from David Muse ---
* %clean removed
* rm -rf %buildroot removed
* defattr removed
* %{_datadir}/licenses/%{name} removed
* updated summary
* added configure script patch for f23/f24
f24 build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11057764
f23 build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11057686
f22 build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11057918
--
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #4 from David Muse --- Updated... Spec URL: http://rudiments.sourceforge.net/rpm/rudiments.spec SRPM URL: http://rudiments.sourceforge.net/rpm/rudiments-0.53-2.fc22.src.rpm -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002
--- Comment #5 from Jens Lody ---
Created attachment 1074268
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1074268&action=edit
proposed rudiments.spec-patch
I attached a proposed patch for the spec-file, that creates a doc subpackage
(large documentation) and finally fremoves the "rm -rf %{buildroot}"-call.
I also fixed the sourceforge-url, so it works (again?).
rpmlints spits out a false positive "only-non-binary-in-usr-lib"-error due to
the *.so.symlink.
I changed the explicit *.so.*-names to
"%{_libdir}/librudiments-%{version}.so.*" in %files-section, so it can handle
newer revisions also.
--
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
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #6 from Jens Lody --- Created attachment 1074270 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1074270&action=edit licensecheck.txt I saw you are also upstream, so you should consider to update the COPYING-file to a recent LGPL, yours is quite old. You should also fix the incorrect fsf-address upstream and mention the different licennse versions in the License-tag see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios . By the way: I forgot in my previous post the explicit docdir= in %install is unneeded, I also removed it in my proposed patch. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #7 from Jens Lody --- Still just informal and just a quick look, I hope I find the time to dig deeper into it soon. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@scrye.com --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi --- Hey David. I would be happy to review this and sponsor you. Could you look at addressing the issues/feedback Jens noted and post an updated spec/srpm for review? 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #9 from Upstream Release Monitoring --- davidleemuse's scratch build of rudiments-0.53-4.fc22.src.rpm for f22 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11221591 -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #10 from David Muse --- updates: * applied Jens' patch * updated fsf address in 2 files where it was wrong * updated COPYING and spec to be very specific about what licenses different parts of the distribution are covered by - mainly LGPL, various other files covered by GPL, example code covered by FSF Unlimited License (FSFUL). Updated Spec: http://rudiments.sourceforge.net/rpm/rudiments.spec Updated SRPM: http://rudiments.sourceforge.net/rpm/rudiments-0.53-4.fc22.src.rpm f22 build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11221591 f23 build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11221664 f24 build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11221780 Is an update to a newer version of the LGPL required for a successful review? If so, I'll look into it. I've considered updating to a newer version of the LGPL before though. The legal nuances between the different versions are daunting to analyze and Rudiments has been covered by LGPL2 for 15 years without incident. -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi --- So, you don't really need to mention the test and build scripts licenses. You want to list the license of the files in the binary packages. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ?rd=Licensing/FAQ#Does_the_License:_tag_cover_the_SRPM_or_the_binary_RPM.3F There's no need to change license version, LGPLv2 is fine, you just want to update the LGPLv2 COPYING file (they updated it when the fsf moved mailing addresses). One other minor thing I noticed from a prelim bit of testing: rudiments.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/librudiments-0.53.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libm.so.6 perhaps you don't need to link -lm? I'll go ahead and take this for review now, look for a full review a bit later hopefully today. ;) -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002
Kevin Fenzi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi ---
None of the issues I see are blocking, so I have sponsored you into the
packager group and approved this review. However, if you could take a look at
the non-blocking issues before importing that would be great.
You should be able to continue the process from:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers?rd=PackageMaintainers/Join#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner
If you have any questions at all, please don't hesitate to ask me in private
email, here, on the devel list or on irc in #fedora-devel.
Welcome to the fun!
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
IGNORE: This seems to be a fedora-review bug where it's trying to install
the debuginfo package twice. No actual issue here.
- non blocker: Perhaps the doc subpackage could be made noarch and not depend
on
the main package? (Also would need a copy of the license then).
That would save space on mirrors and allow people to install the
docs without needing to install the base package.
- non blocker: Could you add comments for the patches in the spec
file? If they have been submitted upstream/why they are needed?
- non blocker: Check the linking to -lm and remove if unneeded.
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
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: "LGPL (v2.1 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or
generated". 492 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/fedora/kevin/1259002-rudiments/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 2 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]: 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[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
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rudiments -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- rudiments-0.53-4.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-a87ff17999 -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- rudiments-0.53-4.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-c816143d56 -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- rudiments-0.53-4.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update rudiments' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-a87ff17999 -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1259002] Review Request: rudiments - C++ class library for developing systems and applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1259002 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- rudiments-0.53-4.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update rudiments' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-c816143d56 -- 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 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
