https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511 --- Comment #15 from Andy Mender <andymenderunix@xxxxxxxxx> --- > - None of the CMake generated files are useful to ship - this can be changed upstream and then should be included in the package. Sounds good. > I think there are changes that can be made upstream to clean up the package longer term, which I will try and get included in the next upstream patch release. Fingers crossed! A couple of remaining points highlighted by rpmlint: Rpmlint ------- Checking: nexus-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm nexus-devel-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm nexus-tools-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm nexus-debuginfo-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm nexus-debugsource-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm nexus-4.4.3-4.fc33.src.rpm nexus.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C NeXus nexus.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US muon -> mun, moon, mu on nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXus.a nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXus.so nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXusCPP.a nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXusCPP.so The *.a static libs should go into a separate nexus-static package, but preferably be removed from the buildroot entirely. Unversioned *.so files should go into the -devel package. I think the problem in the spec file is here (highlighted with <<): %files %license COPYING %doc %{_datadir}/doc/NeXus/README.doc %{_libdir}/libNeXus* << I inspected the final RPM and it does contain "versioned" SO files: - libNeXus.so.1 - libNeXus.so.1.0.0 - libNeXusCPP.so.1 - libNeXusCPP.so.1.0.0 These can be captured in the following way: %{_libdir}/libNeXus.so.1* %{_libdir}/libNeXusCPP.so.1* However, their versions don't match the package version sadly. Your devel package should then explicitly catch the unversioned SO files: %{_libdir}/libNeXus.so %{_libdir}/libNeXusCPP.so More info on devel and static subpackages: - https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages - https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries nexus.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/nexus/COPYING nexus-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation nexus-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/nexus/napi.h nexus-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/nexus/napiu.h Not quite sure why rpmlint listed these, but here's the doc on the error: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address nexus-tools.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libxml2 Not sure whether this is an actual issue. A quick google search shows that lib* library discovery should be left to rpm itself and not be explicitly listed in the SPEC file. Could you try building without it to see whether it still works? [...] nexus.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch3: nexus-add-license.patch 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 14 warnings. I missed this one last time. Should this patch be applied or removed? I see the main package already has a COPYING file listed with %license. -- 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 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
