[Bug 717337] Review Request: URCU - Userspace RCU Implementation

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717337

Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx

--- Comment #7 from Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-09-18 08:00:59 EDT ---
Several of the findings in comment 2 have not been added to the spec file and
have not been commented on either. Please respond to reviewers' comments even
if you disagree with them.


> License:        LGPL v2 or later

The correct license identifier really is "LGPLv2+" as pointed out in comment 2.
The related guidelines are these:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Valid_License_Short_Names


Writing this comment I noticed the linked spec file is out-of-date and doesn't
match the latest src.rpm. Hmmm... continueing with the src.rpm then:


> License:        LGPLv2

So, same comment as above applies. ;)


> Name:           liburcu
> Group:          Development/Libraries

Dunno whether or when RPM will get rid of these Group tags (if at all), but
library base packages typically belong into

  Group: System Environment/Libraries


> %description
> Userspace RCU (Read-Copy-Update) Implementation from the LTTng project.

Very brief and reads more like a summary. The top lines at
http://lttng.org/urcu/ contain a somewhat more detailed description that could
be copied and modified slightly to build a more detailed description:

| This package contains liburcu, a userspace RCU (read-copy-update)
| library. This data synchronization library provides read-side access
| which scales linearly with the number of cores. It does so by allowing
| multiples copies of a given data structure to live at the same time,
| and by monitoring the data structure accesses to detect grace periods
| after which memory reclamation is possible.

What do you think?


> ExclusiveArch:  %ix86 x86_64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x

Based on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Architectures#ExcludeArch_.26_ExclusiveArch
I recommend dropping this, especially since no spec file comment gives a strong
rationale.


> %package -n liburcu-devel
> Requires:       liburcu = %{version}-%{release}

Be aware of %{?_isa} having entered the guidelines as a MUST item:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package


> autoreconf -fvi

No strong feelings here. Just know that depending on what versions of the GNU
Autotools may be required by the liburcu build files, a full autoreconf may
cause broken builds. Sometimes without terminating the RPM package build job.


> make  %{?_smp_mflags}

For more verbose build.log output, this one works:

  V=1 make %{?_smp_mflags}


> %files -n liburcu-devel
> %{_prefix}/include/*

Note that %{_includedir} exists, too, and is the one set by the %configure
macro.

As convenient as wildcards may be, with some packages, it can also be
beneficial to be a little bit more specific about what file names to include,
e.g.

  %{_includedir}/urcu*

or even

  %{_includedir}/urcu/
  %{_includedir}/urcu*.h

would implicitly protect against unexpected renames during package version
upgrades. You would learn about substantial changes below %_includedir due to
the build failing. Not mandatory, of course.


> %{_libdir}/*.a

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries


> # rpmlint *

> liburcu.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/liburcu-qsbr.so.1.0.0
> exit@GLIBC_2.2.5

and several more. Please find out why/when it calls exit and whether you can
get rid of this.


> liburcu-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/userspace-rcu-0.6.3/urcu/list.h
> liburcu-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urcu/rcuhlist.h
> liburcu-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urcu/rculist.h
> liburcu-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urcu/list.h

Please try to get this fixed in the upstream tarball. 0.6.4 is available, btw.


> %doc README LICENSE

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review


[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]