[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-29 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2018-08-30 00:53:04



--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
CubicSDR-0.2.4-1.20180806gita7e4d91.fc28,
SoapySDR-0.6.1-1.20180806gite694813.fc28,
liquid-dsp-1.3.1-3.20180806git9658d81.fc28, soapy-rtlsdr-0.2.5-1.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 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-17 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
CubicSDR-0.2.4-1.20180806gita7e4d91.fc28,
SoapySDR-0.6.1-1.20180806gite694813.fc28,
liquid-dsp-1.3.1-3.20180806git9658d81.fc28, soapy-rtlsdr-0.2.5-1.fc28 has been
pushed to the Fedora 28 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-2018-b2b91c05b7

-- 
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/message/ZV4H7BIAGG5SRG3QH6L5IUC3EOIXQVPP/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-16 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|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
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/message/AX65WTI56UHCRWKS6EGO4ONVF4JDQUS2/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-16 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
CubicSDR-0.2.4-1.20180806gita7e4d91.fc28
liquid-dsp-1.3.1-3.20180806git9658d81.fc28 soapy-rtlsdr-0.2.5-1.fc28
SoapySDR-0.6.1-1.20180806gite694813.fc28 has been submitted as an update to
Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-b2b91c05b7

-- 
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/message/UWUO3RATWNYBXNSDAX6UAAJMWZXZR4UT/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-15 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts  ---
Certainly just add the ExcludeArch.  You should also open a bugzilla ticket
against the package to explain the problem and have it block
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1071880 so that arch maintainers
can (potentially) see 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/message/KJYM2BCNXQ5L5FX4LSCWWV73PS6AUZTO/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-14 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #7 from Matt Domsch  ---
I need some advice.  This fails to build for ppc64le as it requires gcc
-faltivec, which apparently even rawhide gcc doesn't have.  Should I
ExcludeArch this for ppc64le until upstream can address?  Upstream took a stab
at it over a year ago in https://github.com/jgaeddert/liquid-dsp/issues/84 but
our gcc doesn't have -faltivec.

-- 
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/message/ZMQH6QTKTAS7QGS3SK637HYEEHFLBEYA/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-14 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/liquid-dsp

-- 
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/message/AYYFPUBZIGTM5Z7NRG357HXFABPDXRC4/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-14 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |POST
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review+



--- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 Note: No known owner of /usr/include/liquid

Use %{_includedir}/liquid/ instead of %{_includedir}/liquid/* to own the dir.

Package otherwise approved. Just fix this issue before import.


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
 BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "FSF All Permissive", "GPL (v3 or
 later)", "Unknown or generated". 235 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/liquid-
 dsp/review-liquid-dsp/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
 Note: No known owner of /usr/include/liquid
[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.
[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.
[-]: 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]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package 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:
[-]: 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 san

[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-13 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #4 from Matt Domsch  ---
$ rpmlint *liquid*
liquid-dsp.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libliquid.so.1.3
exit@GLIBC_2.2.5  (this is filed as a bug upstream)
liquid-dsp.x86_64: W: no-documentation
liquid-dsp-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.

-- 
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/message/QYZ2JNKZLNJBGUKPT7BKLXAF7J2H7CNC/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-13 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #3 from Matt Domsch  ---
All changes made as requested, packages and specs reposted at
https://domsch.com/fedora/sdr/

-- 
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/message/SF2X5CC44OPLWDLHTPPT3LAO3YTEVHMZ/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-12 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #2 from Matt Domsch  ---
upstream has 136 commits since October 2017 release of 1.3.1.

Upstream never internally bumped their version number; it had 1.2.0 scattered
all over the place. I've bumped that to 1.3.1 now in the patches being applied,
including an autotools patch as upstream doesn't provide the files necessary to
run configure in their tarball.

I've made the other changes as requested and reposted the SRPM and spec. Thank
you for your 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/message/TSU2YTJ3Y2WND6Y4EUI7P2NDE4QZ5KP5/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-12 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
 - Same issue as before, why do you package a snapshot instead of the release

 - Also the latest release is 1.3.1

 - Not needed: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT

 - %setup -n %{name}-%{commit}
%patch0 -p1
%patch1 -p1

   Just use:

%autosetup -p1 -n %{name}-%{commit}

 - Add a comment above each patch explaining why they are needed.

 - The %license LICENSE is not needed here as this subpackage depends already
on the main one which includes the license.

%files -n %{name}-devel
%license LICENSE

-- 
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/message/DHAG4HRUFYLBXYXGRHVGK4H4RDE2OOOS/


[Bug 1614550] Review Request: liquid-dsp - Digital signal processing library for software-defined radios

2018-08-12 Thread bugzilla
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614550

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||1614549




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1614549
[Bug 1614549] Review Request: CubicSDR - Cross-Platform Software-Defined
Radio Application
-- 
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/message/2WGJLUDJABHDLUIJ2VHSG3CZZFAM7LUF/