Bug 2030050

I changed python macro, SPDX license and did some makeup :)

--- a/tinysa-saver.spec 2021-12-07 22:34:48.000000000 +0200
+++ b/tinysa-saver.spec 2022-11-08 10:28:15.981892142 +0200
@@ -5,27 +5,25 @@
 Version:   0.11
 Release:   1%{?dist}
 Summary:   Tool for reading, displaying and saving data from the TinySA
-License:   GPLv3
-URL:       https://github.com/erikkaashoek/tinySA-saver

+License:   GPL-3.0-or-later
+URL:       https://github.com/erikkaashoek/tinySA-saver
 Source0:   %{URL}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
 # Reported upstream: https://github.com/mihtjel/nanovna-saver/issues/163
 Source1:   tinysa-saver.desktop
+
+# OS/distro specific
+Patch0:         tinysa-saver-0.11-fedora-icon.patch
+# original patch
+# https://github.com/mihtjel/nanovna-saver/pull/162
+Patch1:         tinysa-saver-0.11-test-fix.patch
+
 BuildArch: noarch
-BuildRequires: python3-setuptools
+
 BuildRequires: python3-devel
-BuildRequires: python3-pyserial
-BuildRequires: python3-numpy
-BuildRequires: python3-scipy
-BuildRequires: python3-qt5
-BuildRequires: sed
+BuildRequires: python3-pytest
 BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils
 Requires:  hicolor-icon-theme
-# OS/distro specific
-Patch0:        tinysa-saver-0.11-fedora-icon.patch
-# original patch
-# https://github.com/mihtjel/nanovna-saver/pull/162
-Patch1:        tinysa-saver-0.11-test-fix.patch

 %description
 A multiplatform tool to save scans from the TinySA, sweep frequency
@@ -33,17 +31,20 @@
 display and analyze the resulting data.

 %prep
-%setup -q
-%autopatch -p1
+%autosetup -p1 -n %{name}-%{version}

 # Drop shebang of non-executable
 sed -i '1 d' TinySASaver/__main__.py

+%generate_buildrequires
+%pyproject_buildrequires
+
 %build
-%py3_build
+%pyproject_wheel

 %install
-%py3_install
+%pyproject_install
+%pyproject_save_files TinySASaver

 # drop the tests, we do not need them in production, do not use rm -rf
 pushd %{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib}
@@ -63,14 +64,11 @@
   %{SOURCE1}

 %check
-%{python3} setup.py test
+%pytest -v

-%files
-%license LICENSE
+%files -n %{name} -f %{pyproject_files}
 %doc README.md
 %{_bindir}/TinySASaver
-%{python3_sitelib}/TinySASaver
-%{python3_sitelib}/TinySASaver-%{pyversion}-py*.egg-info
 %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps/%{name}.png
 %{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems
that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please
respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the
submitter to proceed with the review.

If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the
fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take
this ticket.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket reviewer failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we reset the status and the assignee of this ticket.

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

I am still interested.

Hello,
I do realize that this is possibly an old ticket. I am sorry that it hasn't been
reviewed yet. Let me trigger the Fedora Review Service to see if the package
builds successfully. Hopefully, a green check mark will attract some reviewer.

If I am resurrecting an old ticket that you are not interested in anymore, my
apologies, feel free to close it.

[fedora-review-service-build]

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9816052
(failed)

Build log:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2030050-tinysa-saver/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09816052-tinysa-saver/builder-live.log.gz

Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.

- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network
  unavailability), please ignore it.
- If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they
  are listed in the "Depends On" field


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

New version:

Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tinysa/tinysa-saver.spec
SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tinysa/tinysa-saver-0.11-2.fc44.src.rpm

There seems to be some problem with the following file.
SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tinysa/tinysa-saver-0.11-2.fc44.src.rpm
Fetching it results in a 404 Not Found error.
Please make sure the URL is correct and publicly available.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Consider using autorelease and autochangelog macros, version for src.rpm does not
match that in the spec file.

Probably also need a appdata file
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/

Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tinysa/tinysa-saver.spec
SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tinysa/tinysa-saver-0.11-1.fc44.src.rpm

Updated:

Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tinysa/tinysa-saver.spec
SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tinysa/tinysa-saver-0.11-1.fc44.src.rpm

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9973491
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2030050-tinysa-saver/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09973491-tinysa-saver/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

- See "Diff spec file in url and in SRPM" at the bottom
- Please, number he patched in the form PatchN
- Note this message:

```
  /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/setuptools/dist.py:599: SetuptoolsDeprecationWarning:
  Invalid dash-separated key 'description-file' in 'metadata' (setup.cfg), please use the underscore name 'description_file' instead.
  !!
          ********************************************************************************
          Usage of dash-separated 'description-file' will not be supported in future
          versions. Please use the underscore name 'description_file' instead.
          (Affected: TinySASaver).
          Available configuration options are listed in:
          https://setuptools.pypa.io/en/latest/userguide/declarative_config.html
          By 2026-Mar-03, you need to update your project and remove deprecated calls
          or your builds will no longer be supported.
          See https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/discussions/5011 for details.
          ********************************************************************************
  !!
    opt = self._enforce_underscore(opt, section)
```

- LICENSE should be added automatically, so you dont need to list in %files


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

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



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

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 General Public License v3.0 or
     later", "Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0", "*No copyright*
     GNU General Public License". 27 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/review-tinysa-
     saver/licensecheck.txt
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.14,
     /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries
     with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: 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.
[ ]: 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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[!]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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 contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
     desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 8900 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
     provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== 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.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[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:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
     attached diff).
     See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: tinysa-saver-0.11-1.fc45.noarch.rpm
          tinysa-saver-0.11-1.fc45.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmphk_z_jhi')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

tinysa-saver.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary TinySASaver
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 9 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s 




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 1

tinysa-saver.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary TinySASaver
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 4 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/erikkaashoek/tinySA-saver/archive/v0.11/tinysa-saver-0.11.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 54be3600c44f1951c8551487d3fbeb23168b2f6c3e341bcc97bf302e9e3a8703
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 54be3600c44f1951c8551487d3fbeb23168b2f6c3e341bcc97bf302e9e3a8703


Requires
--------
tinysa-saver (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    hicolor-icon-theme
    python(abi)
    python3.14dist(numpy)
    python3.14dist(pyqt5)
    python3.14dist(pyserial)
    python3.14dist(scipy)



Provides
--------
tinysa-saver:
    application()
    application(io.github.erikkaashoek.tinySA-saver.desktop)
    metainfo()
    metainfo(io.github.erikkaashoek.tinySA-saver.metainfo.xml)
    python3.14dist(tinysasaver)
    python3dist(tinysasaver)
    tinysa-saver



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/sagitter/./tinysa-saver.spec	2026-01-03 13:46:04.000000000 +0100
+++ /home/sagitter/review-tinysa-saver/srpm-unpacked/tinysa-saver.spec	2026-01-03 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
@@ -1,2 +1,12 @@
+## START: Set by rpmautospec
+## (rpmautospec version 0.8.3)
+## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog
+%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua:
+    release_number = 1;
+    base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}"));
+    print(release_number + base_release_number - 1);
+}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}}
+## END: Set by rpmautospec
+
 # wrong version in the tinysa fork
 %global pyversion 0.2.2
@@ -80,3 +90,6 @@
 
 %changelog
-%autochangelog
+## START: Generated by rpmautospec
+* Sat Jan 03 2026 Jaroslav Škarvada <jskarvad> - 0.11-1
+- Uncommitted changes
+## END: Generated by rpmautospec


Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -n ./tinysa-saver
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Perl, R, Haskell, Java, Ocaml, SugarActivity, C/C++, fonts, PHP
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH