Bug 1950554

Sorry for the delay!

APPROVED, but consider using %make_install or comment why that's not possible, since you do use %make_build

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

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


Issues:
=======

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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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.
[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", "GNU Lesser General Public License,
     Version 2.1", "GNU Lesser General Public License", "Expat License
     [generated file]". 9 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1950554-ocaml-
     camlbz2/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 61440 bytes in 17 files.
[ ]: 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: No rpmlint messages.
[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]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Ocaml:
[x]: This should never happen

===== 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.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: ocaml-camlbz2-0.7.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
          ocaml-camlbz2-devel-0.7.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
          ocaml-camlbz2-debuginfo-0.7.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
          ocaml-camlbz2-debugsource-0.7.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
          ocaml-camlbz2-0.7.0-1.fc35.src.rpm
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: ocaml-camlbz2-debuginfo-0.7.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.



Unversioned so-files
--------------------
ocaml-camlbz2: /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlbz2.so

Source checksums
----------------
https://gitlab.com/irill/camlbz2/-/archive/0.7.0/camlbz2-0.7.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : f725a37d328f0feb77a9e79781627d4efa8f64b98a95fed98cabf383bdabc67a
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f725a37d328f0feb77a9e79781627d4efa8f64b98a95fed98cabf383bdabc67a


Requires
--------
ocaml-camlbz2 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libbz2.so.1()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics)
    ocaml(Stdlib)
    ocaml(Stdlib__callback)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

ocaml-camlbz2-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    bzip2-devel(x86-64)
    ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics)
    ocaml(Stdlib)
    ocaml(Stdlib__callback)
    ocaml-camlbz2(x86-64)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__callback)

ocaml-camlbz2-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

ocaml-camlbz2-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
ocaml-camlbz2:
    ocaml(Bz2)
    ocaml-camlbz2
    ocaml-camlbz2(x86-64)

ocaml-camlbz2-devel:
    ocaml(Bz2)
    ocaml-camlbz2-devel
    ocaml-camlbz2-devel(x86-64)
    ocamlx(Bz2)

ocaml-camlbz2-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    ocaml-camlbz2-debuginfo
    ocaml-camlbz2-debuginfo(x86-64)

ocaml-camlbz2-debugsource:
    ocaml-camlbz2-debugsource
    ocaml-camlbz2-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1950554
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Ocaml, Generic
Disabled plugins: Perl, PHP, R, Ruby, Python, Java, fonts, SugarActivity, Haskell
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

No problem and thank you for the review!  %make_install sets DESTDIR to an incorrect value in this case.  I'll add a comment to the spec file.

(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ocaml-camlbz2

Built in Rawhide.