https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1476458 --- Comment #18 from Otavio R. Piske <angusyoung@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Miroslav Suchý from comment #16) > Can you please provide updated SRC.RPM? The latest I was able to find > > https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/orpiske/paho-testing/fedora- > 26-x86_64/00589833-paho-c/ > contains different tar.gz file from the one located on the Source0 URL. > paho-c.src: W: file-size-mismatch v1.2.0.tar.gz = 441242, > https://github.com/eclipse/paho.mqtt.c/archive/v1.2.0.tar.gz = 431819 Done. It looks like the package was generated incorrectly because my COPR was configured to build from my repository instead of the upstream. I reconfigured it and it should be fine now. The link to the latest SRPM is: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/orpiske/paho-testing/fedora-26-x86_64/00654734-paho-c/paho-c-1.2.0-10.fc26.src.rpm (other builds are available at https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/orpiske/paho-testing/build/654734/) > > > The description should be wrapped to 80 characters (you have 81). Fixed as requested. > > paho-c.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libpaho-mqtt3a.so.1.2.0 > exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > paho-c.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libpaho-mqtt3as.so.1.2.0 > exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > paho-c.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libpaho-mqtt3c.so.1.2.0 > exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > paho-c.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libpaho-mqtt3cs.so.1.2.0 > exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 > shared-lib-calls-exit: > This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork() > context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library > function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the > error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any > state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an > actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the > situation. > > You cannot do anything about it as just maintainer. But you should at least > file issue for upstream. Noted. I opened an issue upstream: https://github.com/eclipse/paho.mqtt.c/issues/342. I'll propose a patch for this one in one of the upcoming versions. > > paho-c.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl > /usr/lib64/libpaho-mqtt3as.so.1.2.0 SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list > paho-c.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl > /usr/lib64/libpaho-mqtt3cs.so.1.2.0 SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list > Again. File issue to upstream: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:CryptoPolicies I opened an issue upstream (though acceptance of this one might be subject to other factors which I may not be fully aware of). https://github.com/eclipse/paho.mqtt.c/issues/347 > > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary MQTTAsync_publish > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary MQTTAsync_subscribe > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary MQTTClient_publish > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary MQTTClient_publish_async > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary MQTTClient_subscribe > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary MQTTVersion > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary paho_c_pub > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary paho_c_sub > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary paho_cs_pub > paho-c-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary paho_cs_sub > This is not blocker for the review, but you should write man pages for those > binaries. There are some changes to be done on the code (as well as documenting these). I am looking forward to provide the man pages for these in the next version. In the mean time, I opened a ticket to track that: https://github.com/eclipse/paho.mqtt.c/issues/346 > > paho-c-devel-doc.noarch: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/doc > You should not own that directory. Instead of > %{_datadir}/* > use > %{_defaultdocdir}/* Noted. > > Are you sure that main package should not contain any /usr/bin/SOMETHING? It > now contains only library. Then such package should be named libpaho-c. I had to review this within the code. I reorganized the binaries in a way that (IMHO) are more adequate now. The 4 paho_c* programs can be used as tools to publish and/or subscribe from topics via command-line, whereas the /usr/bin/MQTT* are the compiled samples that demonstrate basic Paho MQTT C coding concepts. I am not entirely about the validity of providing compiled binaries for the samples. Any thoughts on that? > > I would highly recommend renaming `%package devel-doc` to just `%package > doc`. The doc subpackage for such packages is nearly always meant for > developers. Noted. Based on your suggestion, I renamed it. One last comment is regarding the fedpkg build: I will provide the link to the latest one as soon as I finish setting up my workstation. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
