Bug 2154124
| Summary: | Review Request: rust-noisy_float - Rust library containing floating point types | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | blinxen <h-k-81> | ||||
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Sandro Mani <manisandro> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | manisandro, package-review | ||||
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | manisandro:
fedora-review+
|
||||
| Target Release: | --- | ||||||
| Hardware: | All | ||||||
| OS: | Linux | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2023-02-01 10:24:04 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
blinxen
2022-12-15 22:19:06 UTC
As of now, I no longer need a sponsor. Also the spec file was generated with `rust2rpm`, so the review should be quite simple. The build in rawhide is failing because a `dev-dependency` (rust-criterion) is missing. `criterion` is only used for benchmarking so I just removed it from `Cargo.toml`. Here is the new spec file and the corresponding SRPM: New spec file: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/blinxen/rust-noisy_float/fedora-37-x86_64/05353613-rust-noisy_float/rust-noisy_float.spec New SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/blinxen/rust-noisy_float/fedora-37-x86_64/05353613-rust-noisy_float/rust-noisy_float-0.2.0-1.fc37.src.rpm Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5353619 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2154124-rust-noisy_float/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05353619-rust-noisy_float/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 There is a broken install dependency: Problem: conflicting requests - nothing provides (crate(approx/default) >= 0.4.0 with crate(approx/default) < 0.5.0~) needed by rust-noisy_float+approx-devel-0.2.0-1.fc38.noarch I bumped the approx dependency to 0.5. Here is the new spec file and the corresponding SRPM: Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/blinxen/rust-noisy_float/fedora-37-x86_64/05354682-rust-noisy_float/rust-noisy_float.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/blinxen/rust-noisy_float/fedora-37-x86_64/05354682-rust-noisy_float/rust-noisy_float-0.2.0-1.fc37.src.rpm Created attachment 1940993 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 5353619 to 5355019
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5355019 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2154124-rust-noisy_float/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05355019-rust-noisy_float/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 Looks good to me, approved! Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/cargo/registry/noisy_float-0.2.0/LICENSE See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_duplicate_files ===== 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", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "Apache License 2.0". 4 files have unknown license. [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. [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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [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]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [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 0 bytes in 0 files. [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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [?]: 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. [-]: 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: [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Rpmlint ------- Checking: rust-noisy_float-devel-0.2.0-1.fc38.noarch.rpm rust-noisy_float+default-devel-0.2.0-1.fc38.noarch.rpm rust-noisy_float+approx-devel-0.2.0-1.fc38.noarch.rpm rust-noisy_float+serde-devel-0.2.0-1.fc38.noarch.rpm rust-noisy_float-0.2.0-1.fc38.src.rpm ======================================================================================= rpmlint session starts ====================================================================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/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/tmpelwlo6d9')] checks: 31, packages: 5 rust-noisy_float+approx-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-noisy_float+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-noisy_float+serde-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation ======================================================== 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s ======================================================= Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/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 checks: 31, packages: 4 rust-noisy_float+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-noisy_float+approx-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation rust-noisy_float+serde-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/noisy_float/0.2.0/download#/noisy_float-0.2.0.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1e7b02ec475e966206b5d1385cabf72e4cfa7ef643cc704ddca4e6bdb5000d7a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 978fe6e6ebc0bf53de533cd456ca2d9de13de13856eda1518a285d7705a213af However, diff -r shows no differences Requires -------- rust-noisy_float-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(num-traits/default) >= 0.2.0 with crate(num-traits/default) < 0.3.0~) cargo rust-noisy_float+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(noisy_float) rust-noisy_float+approx-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(approx/default) >= 0.5.0 with crate(approx/default) < 0.6.0~) cargo crate(noisy_float) rust-noisy_float+serde-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(serde/default) >= 1.0.0 with crate(serde/default) < 2.0.0~) cargo crate(noisy_float) Provides -------- rust-noisy_float-devel: crate(noisy_float) rust-noisy_float-devel rust-noisy_float+default-devel: crate(noisy_float/default) rust-noisy_float+default-devel rust-noisy_float+approx-devel: crate(noisy_float/approx) rust-noisy_float+approx-devel rust-noisy_float+serde-devel: crate(noisy_float/serde) rust-noisy_float+serde-devel Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2154124 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: C/C++, PHP, Python, Haskell, SugarActivity, fonts, R, Perl, Ocaml, Java Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-noisy_float |