Bug 2252353

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6714444
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2252353-libmamba/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06714444-libmamba/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.

> /etc/fish/conf.d/micromamba.fish

This should be installed in /usr/share/fish/vendor_conf.d instead.

Alternatively, depending on what the snippets do, it may make sense to replace all the profile scripts with an environment.d file installed into %{_environmentdir}.

https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/latest/environment.d.html

Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/libmamba.spec
SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/libmamba-1.5.3-1.fc40.src.rpm

Thanks for the note - I've updated the fish directory.  These are shell specific configurations.  environment.d does not seem appropriate here.

Created attachment 2002691 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6714444 to 6717284

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6717284
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2252353-libmamba/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06717284-libmamba/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.

I will take this review.

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

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

===== Issues =====
- The python3-libmambapy package is missing
  Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

- Note the rpmlint non-conffile-in-etc warnings.  Should those files be marked
  %config(noreplace)?

- Note the rpmlint no-manual-page-for-binary warning.  Is there a way to
  generate a man page, say with help2man?

- I would encourage you to use %autorelease and %autochangelog, like the other
  packages I have reviewed for you today.  (This is not a MUST, though.)

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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: 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.
[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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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: "Unknown or generated", "BSD 3-Clause License", "*No copyright*
     BSD 3-Clause License", "MIT License". 209 files have unknown license.

     Files with other licenses are not included in the binary RPMs.

[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/profile.d

     That directory is owned by the setup package, which will be present in
     all Fedora installations.

[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
     /usr/share/fish/vendor_conf.d(fish, snapd, nano-default-editor, vim-
     default-editor, environment-modules, Lmod, flatpak)

     I think this is fine.  It's the best you can do without requiring the
     fish package, which would be undesirable.  Perhaps that directory should
     be owned by the filesystem package.

[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.
[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 164038 bytes in 4 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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

Python:
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[x]: 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

===== 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).
[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     python3-libmambapy
[?]: 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]: 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.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libmamba-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm
          libmamba-devel-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm
          micromamba-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm
          python3-libmambapy-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm
          libmamba-debuginfo-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm
          libmamba-debugsource-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm
          libmamba-1.5.3-1.fc40.src.rpm
================================================ rpmlint session starts ================================================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmpflj2jlm4')]
checks: 31, packages: 7

micromamba.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/profile.d/micromamba.csh
micromamba.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/profile.d/micromamba.sh
micromamba.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary micromamba
micromamba.x86_64: W: no-documentation
================= 7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 1.7 s =================




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: libmamba-debuginfo-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.rpm
================================================ rpmlint session starts ================================================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmpalfbd1i7')]
checks: 31, packages: 1

================= 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.8 s =================





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/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: 32, packages: 6

libmamba.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('depsolving', 'Summary(en_US) depsolving -> dissolving, devolving')
libmamba.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('reimplementation', '%description -l en_US reimplementation -> re implementation, re-implementation, implementation')
libmamba.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('conda', '%description -l en_US conda -> coda, condo, conga')
libmamba.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('libsolv', '%description -l en_US libsolv -> absolve')
micromamba.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/profile.d/micromamba.csh
micromamba.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/profile.d/micromamba.sh
micromamba.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary micromamba
micromamba.x86_64: W: no-documentation
 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 4 warnings, 39 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.8 s 



Unversioned so-files
--------------------
python3-libmambapy: /usr/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/libmambapy/bindings.cpython-312-x86_64-linux-gnu.so

Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/mamba-org/mamba/archive/libmamba-1.5.3/libmamba-1.5.3.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : f0b41dfcca80b66f80b9314a0584f32c3785df6d7339a1e6dffac603c651e082
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f0b41dfcca80b66f80b9314a0584f32c3785df6d7339a1e6dffac603c651e082


Requires
--------
libmamba (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
    libarchive.so.13()(64bit)
    libbz2.so.1()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.3()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit)
    libcurl.so.4()(64bit)
    libfmt.so.10()(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)
    libreproc++.so.14()(64bit)
    libreproc.so.14()(64bit)
    libsolv.so.1()(64bit)
    libsolv.so.1(SOLV_1.0)(64bit)
    libsolv.so.1(SOLV_1.2)(64bit)
    libsolv.so.1(SOLV_1.3)(64bit)
    libsolvext.so.1()(64bit)
    libsolvext.so.1(SOLV_1.0)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    libyaml-cpp.so.0.7()(64bit)
    libzstd.so.1()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libmamba-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cmake(tl-expected)
    cmake-filesystem
    cmake-filesystem(x86-64)
    fmt-devel(x86-64)
    json-devel(x86-64)
    libmamba(x86-64)
    libmamba.so.2()(64bit)
    libsolv-devel(x86-64)
    pkgconfig
    reproc-devel(x86-64)
    spdlog-devel(x86-64)
    yaml-cpp-devel(x86-64)

micromamba (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libfmt.so.10()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libmamba(x86-64)
    libmamba.so.2()(64bit)
    libreproc++.so.14()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    libyaml-cpp.so.0.7()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

python3-libmambapy (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libfmt.so.10()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libmamba.so.2()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.11)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.13)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.2)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    python(abi)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libmamba-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

libmamba-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
libmamba:
    libmamba
    libmamba(x86-64)
    libmamba.so.2()(64bit)

libmamba-devel:
    cmake(libmamba)
    libmamba-devel
    libmamba-devel(x86-64)

micromamba:
    micromamba
    micromamba(x86-64)

python3-libmambapy:
    python-libmambapy
    python3-libmambapy
    python3-libmambapy(x86-64)
    python3.12-libmambapy
    python3.12dist(libmambapy)
    python3dist(libmambapy)

libmamba-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    libmamba-debuginfo
    libmamba-debuginfo(x86-64)
    libmamba.so.2.0.0-1.5.3-1.fc40.x86_64.debug()(64bit)

libmamba-debugsource:
    libmamba-debugsource
    libmamba-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2252353 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++, Python
Disabled plugins: PHP, fonts, R, Perl, SugarActivity, Ruby, Ocaml, Haskell, Java
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

(In reply to Jerry James from comment #7)
> ===== Issues =====
> - The python3-libmambapy package is missing
>   Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

Good catch.  Added.

> - Note the rpmlint non-conffile-in-etc warnings.  Should those files be marked
>   %config(noreplace)?

Hmm, this is a bit grey.  I would argue these are not config files - they are critical for setting up micromamba to work properly.  As precedent, the following /etc/profile.d files on my system are not marked config:

/etc/profile.d/colorxzgrep.csh
/etc/profile.d/colorxzgrep.sh
/etc/profile.d/colorzgrep.csh
/etc/profile.d/colorzgrep.sh
/etc/profile.d/conda.csh
/etc/profile.d/conda.sh
/etc/profile.d/flatpak.sh
/etc/profile.d/gawk.csh
/etc/profile.d/gawk.sh
/etc/profile.d/lang.csh
/etc/profile.d/lang.sh
/etc/profile.d/less.csh
/etc/profile.d/less.sh
/etc/profile.d/micromamba.csh
/etc/profile.d/micromamba.sh
/etc/profile.d/modules.csh
/etc/profile.d/modules.sh
/etc/profile.d/toolbox.sh
/etc/profile.d/vte.csh
/etc/profile.d/vte.sh
/etc/profile.d/which2.csh
/etc/profile.d/which2.sh

> 
> - Note the rpmlint no-manual-page-for-binary warning.  Is there a way to
>   generate a man page, say with help2man?

I've asked upstream for a way to build one for micromamba specifically with the sphinx sources.  For now I've used help2man.

> - I would encourage you to use %autorelease and %autochangelog, like the other
>   packages I have reviewed for you today.  (This is not a MUST, though.)

I still spend most of my time on EL8 where rpmautospec is still a bit of a pain.

Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/libmamba.spec
SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/libmamba-1.5.3-2.fc40.src.rpm

(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #8)
> Hmm, this is a bit grey.  I would argue these are not config files - they
> are critical for setting up micromamba to work properly.  As precedent, the
> following /etc/profile.d files on my system are not marked config:

Okay, thanks for pointing out the precedent.

> I've asked upstream for a way to build one for micromamba specifically with
> the sphinx sources.  For now I've used help2man.

Great.

> I still spend most of my time on EL8 where rpmautospec is still a bit of a
> pain.

Okay, good enough. This package is APPROVED.

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libmamba

Thank you very much for the review.

Checked in and built.

# Force the install to be arch dependent

I was wondering... why is this necessary?

The current build system is a hodge-podge of a cmake build for the bindings and then running pip wheel for the rest of the module.  When doing the build for the wheel since it doesn't mention the extension it gets install into sitelib instead of sitearch.  With 2.X upstream will be moving to a scikit-build based build that will integrate everything into one component.

Thanks for the explanation.