Bug 2066841

Koji scratch builds: 

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84546828 (Rawhide)
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=84557822 (F35)

This is needed by the formatting library, which is a new dependency of koji-tool (bug 2066552)

The latest version seems to be 2.0.4.1.  Do you intentionally package older version?

Otherwise looks good.

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]: 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.
     praiskup:This seems like GHC convention:
     libHSdouble-conversion-2.0.2.0-LyOoAmJScaOLjcTJ76YB8b-ghc8.10.5.so
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[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: "BSD 2-Clause License", "Unknown or generated", "BSD 3-Clause
     License". 31 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /tmp/2066841-ghc-double-conversion/licensecheck.txt
     praiskup: BSD-3-Clause "bundled" sources are being removed in %prep,
     off-topic: the actual code seems to be BSD-2-Clause, while usptream claims
     BSD-3-Clause on https://hackage.haskell.org/package/double-conversion
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
     praiskup: standard %ghc_* macros are used
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
     Note: Macros in: ghc-double-conversion (description)
     praiskup: %pkg_name defined by %global
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[?]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
     praiskup: automatic file lists generated by macros
[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.
     praiskup: disabled now: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Haskell/#_debuginfo
[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 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]: 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:
[-]: 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.
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: 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.
     praiskup: no %check for now
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
     praiskup: %ghc_lib_install is used
[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 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
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


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


Unversioned so-files
--------------------
ghc-double-conversion: /usr/lib64/libHSdouble-conversion-2.0.2.0-LyOoAmJScaOLjcTJ76YB8b-ghc8.10.5.so

Source checksums
----------------
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/double-conversion-2.0.2.0/double-conversion.cabal#/double-conversion-2.0.2.0.cabal :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 8e357d1f844276a4e9b3deb0c8e12662cfd5d9435c2386606d6998d92097c105
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8e357d1f844276a4e9b3deb0c8e12662cfd5d9435c2386606d6998d92097c105
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/double-conversion-2.0.2.0/double-conversion-2.0.2.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 44cde172395401169e844d6791b6eb0ef2c2e55a08de8dda96551cfe029ba26b
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 44cde172395401169e844d6791b6eb0ef2c2e55a08de8dda96551cfe029ba26b


Requires
--------
ghc-double-conversion (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libHSarray-0.5.4.0-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSbase-4.14.2.0-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSbinary-0.8.8.0-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSbytestring-0.10.12.0-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHScontainers-0.6.4.1-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSdeepseq-1.4.4.0-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSghc-boot-th-8.10.5-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSghc-prim-0.6.1-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSinteger-gmp-1.0.3.0-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHSpretty-1.1.3.6-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHStemplate-haskell-2.16.0.0-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libHStext-1.2.4.1-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libdouble-conversion.so.3()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgmp.so.10()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

ghc-double-conversion-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    double-conversion-devel(x86-64)
    ghc-compiler
    ghc-devel(base-4.14.2.0)
    ghc-devel(bytestring-0.10.12.0)
    ghc-devel(ghc-prim-0.6.1)
    ghc-devel(text-1.2.4.1)
    ghc-double-conversion(x86-64)



Provides
--------
ghc-double-conversion:
    ghc-double-conversion
    ghc-double-conversion(x86-64)
    libHSdouble-conversion-2.0.2.0-LyOoAmJScaOLjcTJ76YB8b-ghc8.10.5.so()(64bit)

ghc-double-conversion-devel:
    ghc-devel(double-conversion-2.0.2.0-LyOoAmJScaOLjcTJ76YB8b)
    ghc-double-conversion-devel
    ghc-double-conversion-devel(x86-64)
    ghc-double-conversion-static
    ghc-double-conversion-static(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2066841
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api, Haskell
Disabled plugins: fonts, Ocaml, Java, SugarActivity, Python, Perl, R, PHP
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Thank you!

(In reply to Pavel Raiskup from comment #3)
> The latest version seems to be 2.0.4.1.  Do you intentionally package older version?

Just to comment on this: in Fedora Haskell (using cabal-rpm) we are generally tracking
the versions in Stackage LTS: specifically F36/F37 is still currently on Stackage LTS 18.
Maybe cabal-rpm could generate an appropriate comment to reflect that.

Thank you for the review, Pavel

https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/43111

(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ghc-double-conversion

FEDORA-2022-88ab74932a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-88ab74932a

FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858

FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2022-88ab74932a has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-88ab74932a \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-88ab74932a

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-1b0db3c858

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2022-ddd81834b6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ddd81834b6

FEDORA-2022-6684f5640a has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-6684f5640a \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-6684f5640a

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2022-ddd81834b6 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-ddd81834b6 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ddd81834b6

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

FEDORA-2022-ddd81834b6 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

FEDORA-2022-6684f5640a has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.