[Bug 1255973] Review Request: libndn-cxx - C++ library, implementing Named Data Networking (NDN) primitives

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1255973



--- Comment #12 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> ---
- There is a multiple licensing scenario:

BSD (3 clause) LGPL (v3 or later)
---------------------------------
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/util/network-monitor.cpp

GPL (v3 or later)
-----------------
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/mgmt/control-parameters.hpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/mgmt/control-response.cpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/mgmt/control-response.hpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/mgmt/dispatcher.cpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/mgmt/dispatcher.hpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/mgmt/status-dataset-context.cpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/tests/unit-tests/mgmt/dispatcher.t.cpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/tests/unit-tests/mgmt/status-dataset-context.t.cpp

GPL (v3 or later) LGPL (v3 or later)
------------------------------------
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/management/nfd-face-monitor.hpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/util/notification-stream.hpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/src/util/notification-subscriber.hpp
ndn-cxx-ndn-cxx-0.3.4/tests/unit-tests/util/notification-stream.t.cpp

These files are involved in the building, some are provided by the -devel
sub-package; License must be modified and commented:

License: LGPLv3+ and (BSD or LGPLv3+) and (GPLv3+ or LGPLv3+)

See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios

- The directory %{_sysconfdir}/ndn-cxx is not owned.

- Patch0 is not commented.

- Fix the warnings 'unused-direct-shlib-dependency'
See
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues?rd=PackageMaintainers/Common_Rpmlint_Issues#unused-direct-shlib-dependency

- All current versions of Fedora (and their respective RPM versions) treat the
Group tag as optional. 
Packages may include a Group: field for compatibility with EPEL, but are not
required to do so.

However all valid groups are http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/RPMGroups

- Pleas, fix the warning 
  'mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 1)'




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]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "GPL (v3 or later) LGPL (v3 or later)", "LGPL (v3 or later)",
     "BSD (3 clause) LGPL (v3 or later)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or
     generated". 45 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1255973-libndn-cxx/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 /etc/ndn-cxx, /etc/ndn-cxx/ndn
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/ndn-cxx, /etc/ndn-cxx/ndn
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 3 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 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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]: 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 sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libndn-cxx-0.3.4-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm
          libndn-cxx-devel-0.3.4-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm
          libndn-cxx-0.3.4-1.fc24.src.rpm
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Development
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-dskgen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnputchunks3
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-list
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-key-gen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-sig-verify
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-op-tool
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tlvdump
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-get-default
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-operator-tool
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndncatchunks3
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-ls-identity
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-gen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-install
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-install-cert
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-unlock-tpm
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-dsk-gen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-revoke
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-keygen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-dump
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-export
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-set-acl
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-set-default
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-certgen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-import
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-delete
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-sign-req
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-dump-certificate
libndn-cxx-devel.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Development
libndn-cxx-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libndn-cxx-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libndn-cxx.src: W: non-standard-group Development
libndn-cxx.src:9: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 9, tab: line 1)
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 34 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: libndn-cxx-debuginfo-0.3.4-1.fc24.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory
libndn-cxx-devel.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Development
libndn-cxx-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libndn-cxx-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Development
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4 libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4()(64bit)
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4 /lib64/libboost_date_time.so.1.59.0
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4 /lib64/libboost_iostreams.so.1.59.0
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4 /lib64/libboost_program_options.so.1.59.0
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4 /lib64/libboost_unit_test_framework.so.1.59.0
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4 /lib64/librt.so.1
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
/usr/lib64/libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4 /lib64/libm.so.6
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-certgen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndncatchunks3
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-key-gen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-set-default
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-dump
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-export
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-sign-req
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tlvdump
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-unlock-tpm
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-sig-verify
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-op-tool
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-revoke
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-ls-identity
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-dump-certificate
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-get-default
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-gen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-set-acl
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-dsk-gen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-operator-tool
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnputchunks3
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-cert-install
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-keygen
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-install-cert
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-delete
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-import
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-list
libndn-cxx.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ndnsec-dskgen
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 39 warnings.



Requires
--------
libndn-cxx-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    libndn-cxx(x86-64)
    libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4()(64bit)

libndn-cxx (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /sbin/ldconfig
    /usr/bin/sh
    config(libndn-cxx)
    ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
    libboost_chrono.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_date_time.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_filesystem.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_iostreams.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_program_options.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_random.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_regex.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_system.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libboost_unit_test_framework.so.1.59.0()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libcryptopp.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4()(64bit)
    libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
    librt.so.1()(64bit)
    libsqlite3.so.0()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)



Provides
--------
libndn-cxx-devel:
    libndn-cxx-devel
    libndn-cxx-devel(x86-64)
    pkgconfig(libndn-cxx)

libndn-cxx:
    config(libndn-cxx)
    libndn-cxx
    libndn-cxx(x86-64)
    libndn-cxx.so.0.3.4()(64bit)



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/named-data/ndn-cxx/archive/ndn-cxx-0.3.4.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
90280c7f64cdf98ccc1f9bbebc4736da77c416e04a6a103ec9fbedb56bbaa7e4
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
90280c7f64cdf98ccc1f9bbebc4736da77c416e04a6a103ec9fbedb56bbaa7e4


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1255973
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R,
PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

-- 
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]