[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-63261d7bce has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2020-04-18 00:07:24 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-3c7a0db716 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-63261d7bce has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-63261d7bce \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-63261d7bce See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-3c7a0db716 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-3c7a0db716 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-3c7a0db716 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-63261d7bce has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-63261d7bce -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-3c7a0db716 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-3c7a0db716 -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Bug 1807753 depends on bug 1808278, which changed state. Bug 1808278 Summary: Review request: libevdevPlus - a c++ wrapper around libevdev https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808278 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Bug 1807753 depends on bug 1808276, which changed state. Bug 1808276 Summary: Review request: libuInputPlus - C++ wrapper around libuinput https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808276 What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #18 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ydotool -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #17 from Bob Hepple --- Thanks Artem! -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Artem changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Link ID||Github ||ReimuNotMoe/ydotool/issues/ ||62 Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #16 from Artem --- This is really weird. Maybe regression of fedora-review itself which on Rawhide now. This should handled automatically: E: postin-without-ldconfig /usr/lib64/libydotool.so.0.1.9 E: postun-without-ldconfig /usr/lib64/libydotool.so.0.1.9 > Is it normal for the review to take 39m or am I doing something wrong? Unfortunately this tools very slow, but 39m is too much and even on my PC it done faster this package. Package 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753
--- Comment #15 from Bob Hepple ---
I raised the shared-lib-calls-exit issue with upstream:
https://github.com/ReimuNotMoe/ydotool/issues/62
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01327698-ydotool/ydotool-0.1.9-0.1.20200405.git.9c3a4e7.fc31.src.rpm
SPEC URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01327698-ydotool/ydotool.spec
Is it normal for the review to take 39m or am I doing something wrong?
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: 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]: 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:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 12 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bhepple/tmp/ydotool/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/systemd/system,
/usr/lib/systemd
[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and
systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files.
Note: Systemd service file(s) in ydotool
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[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.
[ ]: Fina
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753
--- Comment #14 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
%{?systemd_requires} is not necessary anymore
ldconfig is not needed either, as this is handled by %transfiletrigger
--
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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753
--- Comment #13 from Artem ---
Great, now no errors! The only thing which worries me is this ldconfig invoking
in systemd scriplets. Maybe @eclipseo can help us there?
> Not quite sure what to do about the shared-lib-calls-exit warning - contact
> upstream?
This is highly recommended. Also i asked C++ guy even at day one about this
tool and libs and he said that project is fine, just a little bit somewhat on
"early stage". So it's useful to contact and discuss this with upstream.
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]: 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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 12 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /mnt/data-
linux/tmp/review/1807753-ydotool/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and
systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files.
Note: Systemd service file(s) in ydotool
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Fully versioned depend
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #12 from Bob Hepple --- Thanks for the review, Artem! Not quite sure what to do about the shared-lib-calls-exit warning - contact upstream? It seems a bit trivial since the shared lib is only used in the ydotool program itself. I ran fedora-review again and it seems to be fairly happy. SPEC URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01327296-ydotool/ydotool.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01327296-ydotool/ydotool-0.1.9-0.1.20200403.git.9c3a4e7.fc31.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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753
--- Comment #11 from Artem ---
### Still recommended to do #3:
3. Add pushd/popd and & '%make_build -C %{_target_platform}' macros in %build
stage. This is important and Cmake warn even during build:
"this warning will become a fatal error in future CMake releases."
Code block:
```
%prep
%autosetup -n %{name}-%{commit}
mkdir -p %{_target_platform}
%build
pushd %{_target_platform}
%cmake ..
popd
%make_build -C %{_target_platform}
%install
%make_install -C %{_target_platform}
```
### And remove
%{_exec_prefix}/lib/systemd/
from %files section.
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/systemd/system/ydotool.service
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_duplicate_files
### Also add zero in current date. Use 'rpmdev-bumpspec' for changelogs:
* Tue Apr 01 2020 Bob Hepple -
0.1.9-0.1.20200401git.9c3a4e7
W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1.9-0.1.20200401git.9c3a4e7
['0.1.9-0.1.20200401.git.9c3a4e7.fc33', '0.1.9-0.1.20200401.git.9c3a4e7']
### And there was errors:
W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libydotool.so.0.1.9 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
E: postin-without-ldconfig /usr/lib64/libydotool.so.0.1.9
E: postun-without-ldconfig /usr/lib64/libydotool.so.0.1.9
--
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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #10 from Bob Hepple --- Thanks Robert-André & Artem. Artem, I couldn't quite follow your point about 'pushd/popd' etc but I found that I could eliminate the warning message by adding '.' to the %cmake. I hope that satisfies. SPEC URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01324756-ydotool/ydotool.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01324756-ydotool/ydotool-0.1.9-0.1.20200401.git.9c3a4e7.fc31.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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753
--- Comment #9 from Artem ---
Created attachment 1675094
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1675094&action=edit
Spec file patch
1. Drop '%global __strip /bin/strip'
This handled automatically during build.
2. Replace tabs in description where listing features with '-` char for
example:
Currently implemented command(s):
type - Type a string
key - Press keys
mousemove - Move mouse pointer to absolute position
mousemove_relative - Move mouse pointer to relative position
mouseup - Generate mouse up event
mousedown - Generate mouse down event
click - Click on mouse buttons
recorder - Record/replay input events
->
Currently implemented command(s):
- type - Type a string
- key - Press keys
- mousemove - Move mouse pointer to absolute position
- mousemove_relative - Move mouse pointer to relative position
- mouseup - Generate mouse up event
- mousedown - Generate mouse down event
- click - Click on mouse buttons
- recorder - Record/replay input events
3. Add pushd/popd and & '%make_build -C %{_target_platform}' macros in %build
stage. This is important and Cmake warn even during build:
"this warning will become a fatal error in future CMake releases."
4. Use consistenly macroses in %files section:
%{_includedir}/ydotool/
->
%{_includedir}/%{name}/
5. Add .patch extension to your patch file.
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/systemd/system,
/usr/lib/systemd
Add: %{?systemd_requires} to Requires.
See attached 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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753
--- Comment #8 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
There's an issue here:
%files
%{_libdir}/libydotool.so.0*
%{_unitdir}/%{name}.service
%{_bindir}/%{name}*
%doc README.md
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.*
%{_mandir}/man8/%{name}d.8.*
%post
%systemd_post %{name}.service
%preun
%systemd_preun %{name}.service
%postun
%systemd_postun_with_restart %{name}.service
%license LICENSE
The %license directive is outside the %files list, it should be something
like:
%files
%{_libdir}/libydotool.so.0*
%{_unitdir}/%{name}.service
%{_bindir}/%{name}*
%license LICENSE
%doc README.md
%{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.*
%{_mandir}/man8/%{name}d.8.*
%post %preun and %postun are generally placed after %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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #7 from Bob Hepple --- Latest build: split off -devel package downstream versioning of shared library (as upstream has not responded to request to version it) fixes as above SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01323486-ydotool/ydotool-0.1.9-0.1.20200330.git.9c3a4e7.fc31.src.rpm SPEC URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01323486-ydotool/ydotool.spec -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #6 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
- rm this file in %install, %exclude is only used to sort the files between
multiple packages:
%exclude %{_libdir}/libydotool.a
- do not gzip the man pages, the compression is handled by rpm
- specify the mode
install -p -m 0644 Daemon/%{name}.service %{buildroot}/%{_unitdir}
- you need to add the systemd scriptlets, see
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_systemd
BuildRequires: systemd-rpm-macros
[…]
%post
%systemd_post %{name}.service
%preun
%systemd_preun %{name}.service
%postun
%systemd_postun_with_restart %{name}.service
- Be more specific:
%{_libdir}/libydotool.so
%{_unitdir}/%{name}.service
- The library must be versioned. See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_downstream_so_name_versioning
Downstream .so name versioning
In cases where upstream ships unversioned .so library (so this is not needed
for plugins, drivers, etc.), the packager MUST try to convince upstream to
start versioning it.
If that fails due to unwilling or unresponsive upstream, the packager may start
versioning downstream but this must be done with caution and ideally only in
rare cases. We don’t want to create a library that could conflict with upstream
if they later start providing versioned shared libraries. Under no
circumstances should the unversioned library be shipped in Fedora.
- add a comment explaining why the patch is needed.
- add a newline between your changelog entries
- Fix the changelog entries:
ydotool.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog
0.1.9-0.1.20200322git.9c3a4e7.fc31 ['0.1.9-0.20200317.git.9c3a4e7.fc33',
'0.1.9-0.20200317.git.9c3a4e7']
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_devel_packages
- systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and
systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files.
Note: Systemd service file(s) in ydotool
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets
= 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]: 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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License". 12 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/ydotool/review-ydotool/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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmli
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #5 from Bob Hepple --- Latest builds: SPEC URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01314682-ydotool/ydotool.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01314682-ydotool/ydotool-0.1.9-0.20200317.git.9c3a4e7.fc31.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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #4 from Bob Hepple --- Rebuild per review of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808276 SPEC UR: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01260168-ydotool/ydotool.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/ydotool/fedora-31-x86_64/01260168-ydotool/ydotool-0.1.9-0.20200229.git.9c3a4e7.fc31.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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Artem changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1808276, 1808278 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808276 [Bug 1808276] Review request: libuInputPlus - a c++ wrapper around libuinput https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808278 [Bug 1808278] Review request: libevDevPlus - a c++ wrapper around libevdev -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #3 from Bob Hepple --- New libuInputPlus RR: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808276 New libevDevPlus RR: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1808278 FAS Username: wef -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 --- Comment #2 from Artem --- Please add your FAS [1] name into review. You can use this template: Spec URL: SRPM URL: Description: Fedora Account System Username: --- [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/ -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1807753] Review Request: ydotool - Generic command-line automation tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1807753 Artem changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ego.corda...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ego.corda...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Artem --- Hello. First please file this two dependencies in separate RHBZ ticket https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ReviewGuidelines/#_a_note_on_dependencies -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
