https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1868846 --- Comment #2 from Qiyu Yan <yanqiyu01@xxxxxxxxx> --- > Could you split these into separate lines and sort them alphabetically? > Also, can you check whether it's possible to use the "pkgconfig(foo)" format > for the -devel packages? Fixed, and I am planning to fix same problem for other fcitx5* packages, may need some time. > > > %check > > %ctest > > I see 2 failing tests when building the package locally: > 34: I2020-08-15 17:53:56.580770 emoji.cpp:182] Trying to load emoji for en > from /usr/share/unicode/cldr/common/annotations/en.xml: 2152 entry(s) loaded. > 34: I2020-08-15 17:53:56.580788 addonmanager.cpp:271] Unloading addon emoji > 31/36 Test #34: testemoji ........................ Passed 0.02 sec > 32/36 Test #33: testisocodes ..................... Passed 0.04 sec > 2: > /home/amender/rpmbuild/BUILD/fcitx5-87fb655852092f3ed2f79a3aac86fc6d5d92069f/ > test/dbus_wrapper.sh: line 26: 34577 Aborted (core dumped) > "$@" > 2: > /home/amender/rpmbuild/BUILD/fcitx5-87fb655852092f3ed2f79a3aac86fc6d5d92069f/ > test/dbus_wrapper.sh: line 6: kill: (34562) - No such process > 33/36 Test #2: testdbus .........................***Failed 0.09 sec > F2020-08-15 17:53:56.549280 testdbus.cpp:94] slot failed > /home/amender/rpmbuild/BUILD/fcitx5-87fb655852092f3ed2f79a3aac86fc6d5d92069f/ > test/dbus_wrapper.sh: line 26: 34577 Aborted (core dumped) > "$@" > /home/amender/rpmbuild/BUILD/fcitx5-87fb655852092f3ed2f79a3aac86fc6d5d92069f/ > test/dbus_wrapper.sh: line 6: kill: (34562) - No such process > > Do the tests work for you? I had to disable the tests to run fedora-review. It works, both in copr or local machine e.g. https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/yanqiyu/fcitx5/build/1612145/ > > > %files -f %{name}.lang > > %license LICENSES/LGPL-2.1-or-later.txt > > %doc README.md > > %{_bindir}/* > > I think here you can list the binaries, since there aren't so many of them: > %{_bindir}/fcitx5 > %{_bindir}/fcitx5-configtool > %{_bindir}/fcitx5-remote Using %{_bindir}/%{name} %{_bindir}/%{name}-configtool %{_bindir}/%{name}-remote > > > %files devel > > %{_includedir}/* > > %{_libdir}/cmake/* > > %{_libdir}/*.so > > %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/* > > Here I would be more specific like so: > %{_includedir}/Fcitx5/ > %{_libdir}/cmake/Fcitx5* # quite a lot of CMake dirs > %{_libdir}/libFcitx5*.so > %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/Fcitx5*.pc Done > > It's not mandatory, but it gives you tighter control over what goes into the > package and avoids picking up unintended files :) > > > %files libs > > %{_libdir}/%{name} > > %{_libdir}/*.so.* > > Same here: > %{_libdir}/%{name}/ # that way your package owns the entire dir > %{_libdir}/libFcitx5*.so.* > > You can be even more specific with the SO files to pick up soname bumps, but > again that's not mandatory. Done. > > The full review matrix below. I marked some items as "fail", because I think > they might need to be discussed: > Package Review > ============== > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > [ ] = Manual review needed > > > Issues: > ======= > - Package installs properly. > Note: Installation errors (see attachment) > Review: It might be because I had to build the packages on my F32 system > manually, > but please have a look at the errors at the end of the review. > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > - Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- > file-validate if there is such a file. > Review: Desktop files should be installed using one of the above commands Fixed > > > ===== MUST items ===== > > C/C++: > [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. > [x]: Package contains no static executables. > [!]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. > Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see > attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. > Review: Present in fcitx5-libs. Is it possible to version them? They are meant to be loaded internally, so I tried to exclude them from being included into Provides > [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. > Review: fcitx5-libs can theoretically be installed alone. > Can you add a license file to it as well? Fixed > [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > Note: Directories without known owners: > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/22x22/apps, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16/apps, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/16x16, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128, > /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24, /usr/share/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps > Review: Add a trailing backslash to properly own directories. > Some of these dirs are provided by "hicolor-icon-theme" which should be > added as a Requires. Should have fixed > [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines > [!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. > Review: It depends on another package which is not yet available in the > repos Maybe use a chainbuild? > [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). > Review: "hicolor-icon-theme" possibly missing as Requires. Should fix > [!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. > Review: Can't be verified yet due to failing tests and a dependency on > a package in review. > [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. > Review: 2 tests fail. See earlier comments. No problem on both my machine and COPR > ===== EXTRA items ===== > > Generic: > [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. > Note: Mock build failed > See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- > guidelines/#_use_rpmlint > [ ]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package > is arched. > Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 5662720 bytes in /usr/share > Review: Worth moving stuff from %{_datadir}/%{name} to a separate > fcitx5-data package? fixed! > > > Installation errors > ------------------- > INFO: mock.py version 2.4 starting (python version = 3.8.5)... > Start: init plugins > INFO: selinux enabled > Finish: init plugins > INFO: Signal handler active > Start: run > Start: chroot init > INFO: calling preinit hooks > INFO: enabled root cache > INFO: enabled package manager cache > Start: cleaning package manager metadata > Finish: cleaning package manager metadata > INFO: enabled HW Info plugin > Mock Version: 2.4 > INFO: Mock Version: 2.4 > Finish: chroot init > INFO: installing package(s): > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-libs-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655. > fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-devel-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655. > fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-debuginfo-0-0.1. > 20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-debugsource-0-0.1. > 20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32. > x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-libs-debuginfo-0-0.1. > 20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > ERROR: Command failed: > # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ > --releasever 34 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local > --disableplugin=spacewalk install > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-libs-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655. > fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-devel-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655. > fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-debuginfo-0-0.1. > 20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-debugsource-0-0.1. > 20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32. > x86_64.rpm > /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/fcitx5/fcitx5-libs-debuginfo-0-0.1. > 20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts > > > > Rpmlint > ------- > Checking: fcitx5-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > fcitx5-devel-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > fcitx5-libs-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > fcitx5-debuginfo-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > fcitx5-debugsource-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32.x86_64.rpm > fcitx5-0-0.1.20200813git87fb655.fc32.src.rpm > fcitx5.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) fcitx -> deficit > fcitx5.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Fcitx -> Deficit > fcitx5.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/X11/xinit/xinput.d/fcitx5.conf > fcitx5.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fcitx5 > fcitx5.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fcitx5-configtool > fcitx5.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fcitx5-remote > fcitx5-devel.x86_64: W: description-shorter-than-summary > fcitx5-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation > fcitx5-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation > fcitx5.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) fcitx -> deficit > fcitx5.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Fcitx -> Deficit > 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings. > > > > > Unversioned so-files > -------------------- > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/classicui.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/clipboard.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/dbus.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/dbusfrontend.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/emoji.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/ibusfrontend.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/kimpanel.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/notificationitem.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/notifications.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/quickphrase.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/spell.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/testfrontend.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/testim.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/testui.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/unicode.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/wayland.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/waylandim.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/xcb.so > fcitx5-libs: /usr/lib64/fcitx5/xim.so They are not to be versioned(for fcitx5 internal usage only), so I added %global __provides_exclude_from ^%{_libdir}/%{name}/.*\\.so$ to exclude them from being captured by auto scanning. -- 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
