https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1973682 Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(code@musicinmybra |needinfo?(riehecky@xxxxxxxx |in.net) |) --- Comment #17 from Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- I’m not quite done picking at the details, but we’re getting very close. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== Issues ===== - Unless I am missing something, you should set -DBUILD_STATIC_LIBS:BOOL=OFF, and remove the -static subpackage. From https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_packaging_static_libraries, “In general, packagers SHOULD NOT ship static libraries.” - The build system is still overriding the optimization flags (adding -O3) and the C++ standard flags (forcing C++11) from the environment (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags). I am attaching a patch that should correct this. Note that linking C++ code compiled with different standard versions is not reliable, as there is no ABI compatibility across different standards—so when library packages in Fedora use different C++ flags from the distribution defaults, dependent packages can fail to link or, worse, crash at runtime. - I missed this before, but please split the shared libraries into a -libs subpackage. See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1955394#c5 and the following discussion for an explanation of how this helps with multilib filtering. Once you’ve done this, you’ll have to change Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} to Requires: %{name}-libs%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in the -devel package, and add it in the base package. You should also add the same fully-versioned dependency to the python3-jsonnet subpackage; even though it automatically depends on the shared library, we want the version and release to stay in sync within subpackages built from the same source. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_requiring_base_package. - As long as you are packaging the (currently un-built but partially usable) documentation, you might as well throw in the examples/ to the -doc subpackage—probably without the check.sh scripts. ===== Notes (no change required) ===== - I still think that Source0: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz would result in a better archive name than the current Source0: %{url}/archive/refs/tags/v%{version}.tar.gz but you are not required to change it. - I very much agree with your choice to remove the dependency on the base package from the -doc subpackage; I was going to request that, but you beat me to it. - The patch to link the Python extension dynamically is great. I’m not sure I would have taken the time to figure that out. Static linking across subpackages of the same source RPM is not against the Fedora guidelines, but it’s always nice to reduce duplication. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [!]: Package contains no static executables. Static library (.a) is built and installed. [x]: 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. There is a Python extension module, correctly installed. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Generic License", "NTP License". 483 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/reviewer/1973682-jsonnet/licensecheck.txt Note that the RSA license is incorrectly detected as “NTP License” [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. See Issues. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. Multiple bundled libraries, correctly removed in prep, except md5 copylib which is correctly handled. [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. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines (except as noted) [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 requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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]: 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [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]: Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: jsonnet-static. [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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-jsonnet , jsonnet-static [x]: Package functions as described. (based on tests passing) [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not 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]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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: jsonnet-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.rpm python3-jsonnet-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.rpm jsonnet-devel-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.rpm jsonnet-static-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.rpm jsonnet-doc-0.17.0-1.fc35.noarch.rpm jsonnet-debuginfo-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.rpm jsonnet-debugsource-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.rpm jsonnet-0.17.0-1.fc35.src.rpm jsonnet.aarch64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting jsonnet.aarch64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jsonnet jsonnet.aarch64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jsonnetfmt python3-jsonnet.aarch64: W: summary-not-capitalized C jsonnet Bindings for Python python3-jsonnet.aarch64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting jsonnet-devel.aarch64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting jsonnet-devel.aarch64: W: no-documentation jsonnet-static.aarch64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting jsonnet-static.aarch64: W: no-documentation jsonnet-doc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting jsonnet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US templating -> contemplating, template, tempting jsonnet.src:22: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(md5-thilo) 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: jsonnet-debuginfo-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Unversioned so-files -------------------- python3-jsonnet: /usr/lib64/python3.10/site-packages/_jsonnet.cpython-310-aarch64-linux-gnu.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/google/jsonnet/archive/refs/tags/v0.17.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 076b52edf888c01097010ad4299e3b2e7a72b60a41abbc65af364af1ed3c8dbe CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 076b52edf888c01097010ad4299e3b2e7a72b60a41abbc65af364af1ed3c8dbe Requires -------- jsonnet (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-aarch64.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libjsonnet.so.0()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) python3-jsonnet (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-aarch64.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libjsonnet.so.0()(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) jsonnet-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jsonnet(aarch-64) libjsonnet++.so.0()(64bit) libjsonnet.so.0()(64bit) jsonnet-static (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jsonnet-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jsonnet-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): jsonnet-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- jsonnet: bundled(md5-thilo) jsonnet jsonnet(aarch-64) libjsonnet++.so.0()(64bit) libjsonnet.so.0()(64bit) python3-jsonnet: python-jsonnet python3-jsonnet python3-jsonnet(aarch-64) python3.10-jsonnet python3.10dist(jsonnet) python3dist(jsonnet) jsonnet-devel: jsonnet-devel jsonnet-devel(aarch-64) jsonnet-static: jsonnet-static jsonnet-static(aarch-64) jsonnet-doc: jsonnet-doc jsonnet-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) jsonnet-debuginfo jsonnet-debuginfo(aarch-64) libjsonnet++.so.0.17.0-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.debug()(64bit) libjsonnet.so.0.17.0-0.17.0-1.fc35.aarch64.debug()(64bit) jsonnet-debugsource: jsonnet-debugsource jsonnet-debugsource(aarch-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1973682 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Haskell, PHP, Java, SugarActivity, Perl, Python, Ocaml, fonts, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
