Bug 2049681

I'm still waiting on COPR to finish its builds, but there are compile issues on s390x:
  
  https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mhayden/awscliv2/fedora-rawhide-s390x/03415438-s2n-tls/

If s390x isn't important for you, you may want to add something like this to the spec file:

  ExcludeArch:    s390x

Using the `forgemeta` macros could save some work down the road:

  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/#_using_forges_hosted_revision_control

Your spec could look something like this:

%global         srcname     s2n-tls
%global         forgeurl    https://github.com/davdunc/%{name}
Version:        1.3.2
%global         tag         %{version}
%forgemeta

Name:           %{srcname}
Release:        %autorelease
Summary:        s2n: an implementation of the TLS/SSL protocols utilities

License:        ASL 2.0
URL:            %forgeurl
Source0:        %forgesource

Then your %prep just becomes:

%prep
%forgeautosetup

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

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


Issues:
=======

- Use ExcludeArch for s390x since it does not build successfully there.
- Consider using the forgemeta macros for handling source.
- Use the %dir macro to ensure the created directories are properly owned (see [!] items below).
- Are there any valid/useful tests to run during the package build?


===== 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 successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
     Note: Using prebuilt packages
[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", "OpenSSL License Apache License 2.0", "*No
     copyright* MIT License", "*No copyright* Public domain MIT License",
     "*No copyright* Public domain", "CMU License", "MIT License". 6789
     files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/s2n-tls/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/s2n/cmake,
     /usr/lib64/s2n/cmake/modules, /usr/lib64/s2n/cmake/shared,
     /usr/lib64/s2n
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/s2n/cmake/modules,
     /usr/lib64/s2n/cmake, /usr/lib64/s2n, /usr/lib64/s2n/cmake/shared
[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.
[x]: 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 143360 bytes in 5 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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 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

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in s2n-tls-
     libs , s2n-tls-devel
[x]: 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.
[!]: 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]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[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.


Rpmlint
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:



Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


Unversioned so-files
--------------------
s2n-tls-libs: /usr/lib64/libs2n.so

Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/davdunc/s2n-tls/archive/v1.3.2/s2n-tls-1.3.2.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 9a43f97cc3c751c19a03fb6e07eea10e1452034c20a3656a333c3d068756a888
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 9a43f97cc3c751c19a03fb6e07eea10e1452034c20a3656a333c3d068756a888


Requires
--------
s2n-tls (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    openssl

s2n-tls-libs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.3()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)
    s2n-tls(x86-64)

s2n-tls-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    openssl-devel
    s2n-tls-libs(x86-64)

s2n-tls-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
s2n-tls:
    s2n-tls
    s2n-tls(x86-64)

s2n-tls-libs:
    libs2n.so()(64bit)
    s2n-tls-libs
    s2n-tls-libs(x86-64)

s2n-tls-devel:
    s2n-tls-devel
    s2n-tls-devel(x86-64)

s2n-tls-debugsource:
    s2n-tls-debugsource
    s2n-tls-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name s2n-tls --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: PHP, Ocaml, SugarActivity, fonts, Python, Perl, Haskell, Java, R
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

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

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.

This is not dead, afaik.

The needinfo fell off. Putting it back on...

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

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.