https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1988151 Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> --- Neither issue below warrants blocking the package. This package is APPROVED. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Note the description-line-too-long warning from rpmlint. There is a macro on the indicated line that expands to a fairly long string. - Regarding support for ppc64le and s390x, it looks like the only assembly is in defs.h, used to define the spin_loop_pause() function, right? If that is the case, then it would be correct (although unfriendly to the CPU) to define an empty spin_loop_pause() function, or to expand to whatever the no-op instruction is for each platform. For PowerPC, something like this (largely stolen from the Linux kernel's arch/powerpc/include/asm/vdso/processor.h): namespace atomic_queue { constexpr int CACHE_LINE_SIZE = 128; static inline void spin_loop_pause() noexcept { asm volatile("or 1, 1, 1" ::: "memory"); } } For s390x, something like this (again stolen from the Linux kernel, but in arch/s390/include/asm/processor.h): namespace atomic_queue { constexpr int CACHE_LINE_SIZE = 256; static inline void spin_loop_pause() noexcept { asm volatile("bcr 14,0" ::: "memory"); } } I know you aren't upstream, just saying that if you want to see the ExclusiveArch go away, it may not be too difficult to make that happen. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [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]: 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. [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. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [!]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. It needs an ExclusiveArch tag. See comment above about that. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 1 files. [x]: 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 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]: 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]: 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. [-]: 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]: %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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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: atomic-queue-devel-0-0.1.20210731gitaa08199.fc36.x86_64.rpm atomic-queue-0-0.1.20210731gitaa08199.fc36.src.rpm atomic-queue-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lockless -> luckless, lock less, lock-less atomic-queue-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US aren -> earn, are, arena atomic-queue-devel.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The atomic-queue-devel package contains libraries and header files for developing atomic-queue.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lockless -> luckless, lock less, lock-less atomic-queue.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lockless -> luckless, lock less, lock-less atomic-queue.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US aren -> earn, are, arena atomic-queue.src:124: W: macro-in-%changelog %autochangelog 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- rpmlint: 2.0.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 1 atomic-queue-devel.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long The atomic-queue-devel package contains libraries and header files for developing ================= 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings, 1 badness; has taken 0.0 s ================= Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/max0x7ba/atomic_queue/archive/aa08199a7a516a561be1685afb644cf99e5b98e9/atomic_queue-aa08199a7a516a561be1685afb644cf99e5b98e9.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a5bab145a2185993d6c81437f263d7bf557bfd8f4d31d4ad3c720136b5402f63 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a5bab145a2185993d6c81437f263d7bf557bfd8f4d31d4ad3c720136b5402f63 Requires -------- atomic-queue-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- atomic-queue-devel: atomic-queue-devel atomic-queue-devel(x86-64) atomic-queue-static Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1988151 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Python, Perl, fonts, PHP, Java, Haskell, Ruby, SugarActivity, Ocaml, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ 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
