[Bug 1208738] Review Request: vera++ - A tool for verification, analysis and transformation of C++ source code

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208738



--- Comment #6 from Taylor Braun-Jones <taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #4)
> Thanks for the fixes. So let's look deeper into the project details.
> 
> (In reply to Taylor Braun-Jones from comment #3)
> > (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #2)
> > > * MUST: Remove the Group: line. This tag is deprecated since Fedora 17.
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/
> > > How_to_create_an_RPM_package#SPEC_file_overview
> > 
> > So should I remove this even if I'm targeting EPEL6?
> 
> Not sure for what it is needed at all. 

Neither am I. Removed.

> > > * SHOULD: Why do you package the cmake and tcl files? Those look like source
> > > or general development files to me. Shouldn't they be placed into a -devel
> > > subpackage? Maybe do not include them at all (if in doubt).
> > > > %{_libdir}/%{name}/*.cmake
> > > > %{_libdir}/%{name}/*.cmake.in
> > > …
> > > > %{_libdir}/%{name}/rules/*.tcl
> > > > %{_libdir}/%{name}/transformations/*.tcl
> > 
> > These provide the CMake macros needed to integrate automatic vera++ checks
> > into a CMake-based project. See "Running Vera++ as a test with CMake" and
> > "Running Vera++ during the build with CMake" here:
> > 
> > https://bitbucket.org/verateam/vera/wiki/Running
> 
> * Okay, vera++ can be used as a standalone executable besides a full
> integration into another project at build time. Please put those *.cmake*
> files into an own (sub-)package named vera++-devel or cmake-vera++ because
> they are not needed for the minimal use case. Put the main package as a
> Requires. For the tcl files, please see my next comment as this seems to be
> another special case.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages

Okay, cmake files moved into devel subpackage

> * Further, you would have to comply with tcl guideline in particular,
> package especially the *.tcl files into tcl-vera++ as the special guideline
> tells. Also pay attention to the other requirements there.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tcl
> 
> --
> Some other new things I see as general review points by now:
> 
> * There is some ctest stuff provided in the upstream source. You could use
> that for a %check section in your spec file.
> https://bitbucket.org/verateam/vera/src/
> 30f9235797e5e6c34fda48bdaa05af1c0e558dd8/vera.ctest?at=master
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Cmake#Specfile_Usage

This is what I have in the current .spec file posted for review:

%check
cd build
# Skip test that fails when run inside a mock chroot. See:
# https://bitbucket.org/verateam/vera/issue/73
ctest --output-on-failure --exclude-regex RuleDUMP

Is that what you are referring to?
> * For EPEL, you have to use cmake28 as for RHEL instead of just cmake.
> Please adjust the contitional.

So you want something like this:

%if (0%{?rhel} == 6) || (0%{?epel} == 6)

Is that right? If so, I can certainly do that, but I'm not sure what the point
of the extra conditional is. Under what scenario would check for (0%{?rhel} ==
6) not be sufficient?

> * Please put the generated files from the doc subfolders also in the package
> (or a %{name}-doc named and noarch subpackage if the content is more than
> 1MB in size), you could do this easily by help from the %doc macro.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation

The only doc file that gets generated is vera++.html which is only 59K.

> * Plugins (lua, python, tcl) could also get their own subpackage named as
> %{name}-plugins. But this is SHOULD only if it saves some significant space
> in the main package (>1MB).
> https://bitbucket.org/verateam/vera/src/
> 30f9235797e5e6c34fda48bdaa05af1c0e558dd8/src/plugins/?at=master
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package#Subpackages

So even the .tcl files would go in this %{name}-plugins package? I like that
approach best because even though the sum of all the .py, tcl, and .lua files
is less than 200K currently, I expect that it will continue to grow since
python and lua support is a brand new feature. And I think grouping all of
these files into a %{name}-plugins seems more sensible and discoverable than
putting some into a tcl-vera++ package.

> * There's also a manpage generated that you should include into the package.

Isn't that covered by the following line?

%{_datadir}/man/man1/%{name}.1*

-- 
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





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