Bug 2219206

Koji build results:

[banther@z13 tlmi-auth]$ fedpkg --release f38 scratch-build --srpm results_tlmi-auth/1.0.1/1.fc38/tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm
[====================================] 100% 00:00:00  25.07 KiB 355.32 KiB/sec
Building tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm for f38-candidate
Created task: 102863114
Task info: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=102863114
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
102863114 build (f38-candidate, tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm): free
102863114 build (f38-candidate, tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm): free -> open (buildvm-s390x-22.s390.fedoraproject.org)
  102863121 rebuildSRPM (noarch): open (buildvm-s390x-26.s390.fedoraproject.org)
  102863178 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, x86_64): free
  102863180 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, ppc64le): free
  102863181 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, s390x): free
  102863179 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, aarch64): open (buildvm-a64-13.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  102863177 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, i686): open (buildvm-x86-31.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  102863121 rebuildSRPM (noarch): open (buildvm-s390x-26.s390.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  3 free  3 open  1 done  0 failed
  102863178 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, x86_64): free -> open (buildvm-x86-07.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  102863180 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, ppc64le): free -> open (buildvm-ppc64le-06.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  102863181 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, s390x): free -> open (buildvm-s390x-23.s390.fedoraproject.org)
  102863178 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, x86_64): open (buildvm-x86-07.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  5 open  2 done  0 failed
  102863181 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, s390x): open (buildvm-s390x-23.s390.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  4 open  3 done  0 failed
  102863179 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, aarch64): open (buildvm-a64-13.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  3 open  4 done  0 failed
  102863177 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, i686): open (buildvm-x86-31.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  2 open  5 done  0 failed
  102863180 buildArch (tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm, ppc64le): open (buildvm-ppc64le-06.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  1 open  6 done  0 failed
102863114 build (f38-candidate, tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm): open (buildvm-s390x-22.s390.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  0 open  7 done  0 failed

Taking this review.

> Spec URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bPBx46As9m1P-Ht7wMo1tJXdxUlWRMaO/view?usp=sharing
> SRPM URL: https://drive.google.com/file/d/19wqjKZbKgjlYinG25gaACfQ_5RBjBQzs/view?usp=sharing

I can't use fedora-review with this, can you please put these somewhere that can be accessed as raw content directly via HTTP(S)?

Thanks Neal,

As discussed - created a COPR project; thanks for the pointers

Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mpearson/tlmi-auth/fedora-38-x86_64/06154284-tlmi-auth/tlmi-auth.spec
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mpearson/tlmi-auth/fedora-38-x86_64/06154284-tlmi-auth/tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.src.rpm
Copr Build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mpearson/tlmi-auth/build/6154284/

Let me know if you need anything else. 
Note - the rawhide build worked, but the fedora-review section failed.
Mark

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

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


===== 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: "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "*No copyright* GNU
     General Public License, Version 2", "Unknown or generated", "*No
     copyright* GNU General Public License v2.0 or later [obsolete FSF
     postal address (Temple Place)]". 2 files have unknown license.
     Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-
     rpmbuild/results/tlmi-auth/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.
[-]: 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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: 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 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]: 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:
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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]: 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.
[x]: 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]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          tlmi-auth-debuginfo-1.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          tlmi-auth-debugsource-1.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm
          tlmi-auth-1.0.1-1.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/tmphr1o2toj')]
checks: 31, packages: 4

tlmi-auth.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tlmi-auth
 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: tlmi-auth-debuginfo-1.0.1-1.fc38.x86_64.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/tmp_rcnzl__')]
checks: 31, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 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: 3

tlmi-auth.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tlmi-auth
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://www.github.com/lenovo/tlmi-auth//archive/refs/tags/v1.0.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 7350e29be99a47791b6024200a0baa9a44d76f30d4df8cbe2e1b566e52f7af8a
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 7350e29be99a47791b6024200a0baa9a44d76f30d4df8cbe2e1b566e52f7af8a


Requires
--------
tlmi-auth (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.3()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

tlmi-auth-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

tlmi-auth-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
tlmi-auth:
    tlmi-auth
    tlmi-auth(x86-64)

tlmi-auth-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    tlmi-auth-debuginfo
    tlmi-auth-debuginfo(x86-64)

tlmi-auth-debugsource:
    tlmi-auth-debugsource
    tlmi-auth-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name tlmi-auth --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-38-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, R, Perl, Python, PHP, fonts, Java, Ocaml, Haskell
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

I see no issues of note (and I'll sponsor you to be a packager), so...

PACKAGE APPROVED.

As a note, when I try and create the repo with fedpkg I get this:

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/code/toddlers/plugins/scm_request_processor.py", line 200, in process
    self.process_ticket(issue)
  File "/code/toddlers/plugins/scm_request_processor.py", line 308, in process_ticket
    self.create_new_repo(
  File "/code/toddlers/plugins/scm_request_processor.py", line 591, in create_new_repo
    pdc.new_global_component(repo, dist_git_url)
  File "/code/toddlers/utils/pdc.py", line 223, in new_global_component
    pdc["global-components"]._(payload)
  File "/usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/pdc_client/__init__.py", line 347, in __call__
    return self.client(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/beanbag/namespace.py", line 135, in fn
    return basefn(getattr(self, ".base"), getattr(self, ".path"),
  File "/usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/beanbag/url_v1.py", line 102, in call
    return self.make_request(path, verb, kwargs, body)
  File "/usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/beanbag/url_v1.py", line 154, in make_request
    raise BeanBagException(r,
beanbag.bbexcept.BeanBagException: Bad response code: 500

I assume this is just the tooling having a bad day so will try again later/tomorrow. I may have upset it - it took me a while to realise that RH bugzilla was using my lenovo address and I had to correct that after a few previous attempts.

Mark

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tlmi-auth

FEDORA-2023-78226a5970 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-78226a5970

FEDORA-2023-78226a5970 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

FEDORA-2023-59cd1cada6 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-59cd1cada6

So...I think I'm 'done' :) Or at least the package is created and available in testing for Fedora38 and forwards.
If I've understood it correctly - it will move from testing to stable in 7 days (presumably as long as no issues)

I've tested it and it worked for me.

If there's anything else I'm supposed to do let me know.
Many thanks for the help along the way

mark

FEDORA-2023-59cd1cada6 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-59cd1cada6 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-59cd1cada6

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

FEDORA-2023-59cd1cada6 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.