Bug 1244977

hi
seem missing src rpm ...
available newer release 1.1.0
this package use hadoop?
regards

(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #1)
> available newer release 1.1.0
https://github.com/ofiwg/libfabric/tags

SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/libfabric-1.1.0-1.fc21.src.rpm

* Wed Aug 26 2015 Orion Poplawski <orion.com> - 1.1.0-1
- Update to 1.1.0


I see no mention of hadoop.

hi can you take this for me?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=846561

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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: "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 76 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/gil/1244977-libfabric/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/rdma(kernel-
     headers)
[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.
[-]: 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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
     that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[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 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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
 available 1.1.1rc1
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: 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.
[?]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[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: libfabric-1.1.0-1.fc24.i686.rpm
          libfabric-devel-1.1.0-1.fc24.i686.rpm
          libfabric-1.1.0-1.fc24.src.rpm
libfabric.i686: W: no-documentation
libfabric.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fi_info
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: libfabric-debuginfo-1.1.0-1.fc24.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
sh: /usr/bin/python: File o directory non esistente
libfabric.i686: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib/libfabric.so.1.1.0 libfabric.so.1(FABRIC_1.0)
libfabric.i686: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib/libfabric.so.1.1.0 libfabric.so.1
libfabric.i686: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib/libfabric.so.1.1.0 /lib/libnl-route-3.so.200
libfabric.i686: W: no-documentation
libfabric.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fi_info
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.



Requires
--------
libfabric (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /sbin/ldconfig
    libc.so.6
    libdl.so.2
    libfabric.so.1
    libfabric.so.1(FABRIC_1.0)
    libibverbs.so.1
    libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.0)
    libibverbs.so.1(IBVERBS_1.1)
    libnl-3.so.200
    libnl-3.so.200(libnl_3)
    libnl-route-3.so.200
    libpthread.so.0
    librdmacm.so.1
    librdmacm.so.1(RDMACM_1.0)
    librt.so.1
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libfabric-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libfabric(x86-32)
    libfabric.so.1



Provides
--------
libfabric:
    libfabric
    libfabric(x86-32)
    libfabric.so.1
    libfabric.so.1(FABRIC_1.0)

libfabric-devel:
    libfabric-devel
    libfabric-devel(x86-32)



Source checksums
----------------
http://downloads.openfabrics.org/downloads/ofi/libfabric-1.1.0.tar.bz2 :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : b680c98abccf1c5078ddbddbfb9ac24e0c78cf8b1bf871ce81b6427e22d2afbc
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b680c98abccf1c5078ddbddbfb9ac24e0c78cf8b1bf871ce81b6427e22d2afbc


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
Command line :/bin/fedora-review -b 1244977 -m fedora-rawhide-i386
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Issues:
[!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/rdma(kernel-
     headers)

NON blocking issues:
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
 available 1.1.1rc1

/usr/include/rdma is known and expected to be shared among librdmacm-devel, kernel-headers, and libfrabric - https://github.com/ofiwg/libfabric/issues/1277

Thanks for the explanation, please, add a comment in the spec file, with reference to the libfabric#1277 issues
Seem all fine now. Approved.

Will do.  Thanks for the review.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: libfabric
Short Description: Open Fabric Interfaces
Upstream URL: http://ofiwg.github.io/libfabric/
Owners: orion
Branches: f22 f23 el6 epel7
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

Checked in and built.