Bug 2263560

This package built on koji:  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113245316

Oh, packaged version is crashing to me, but just make && ./ethq does not.

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x00007ffff7ccd4ae in std::local_Rb_tree_decrement (__x=0x55555557f708 <StringsetParser::parsers[abi:cxx11]+8>)
    at ../../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/tree.cc:98
Downloading source file /usr/src/debug/gcc-13.2.1-4.fc38.x86_64/obj-x86_64-redhat-linux/x86_64-redhat-linux/libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/../../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/tree.cc
98              && __x->_M_parent->_M_parent == __x)                                                                  
(gdb) bt
#0  0x00007ffff7ccd4ae in std::local_Rb_tree_decrement (__x=0x55555557f708 <StringsetParser::parsers[abi:cxx11]+8>)
    at ../../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/tree.cc:98
#1  std::_Rb_tree_decrement (__x=__x@entry=0x55555557f708 <StringsetParser::parsers[abi:cxx11]+8>)
    at ../../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/c++98/tree.cc:123
#2  0x000055555555fcb0 in std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> >::operator-- (this=<synthetic pointer>)
    at /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_tree.h:302
#3  std::_Rb_tree<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*>, std::_Select1st<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> >, std::less<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::allocator<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> > >::_M_get_insert_unique_pos(std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&) [clone .constprop.0] (__k="fsl_dpaa2_eth", this=<optimized out>) at /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_tree.h:2127
#4  0x000055555555ef96 in std::_Rb_tree<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*>, std::_Select1st<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> >, std::less<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::allocator<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> > >::_M_get_insert_hint_unique_pos (this=0x55555557f700 <StringsetParser::parsers[abi:cxx11]>, 
    __k="fsl_dpaa2_eth", __position=...) at /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_tree.h:2256
#5  std::_Rb_tree<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*>, std::_Select1st<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> >, std::less<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::allocator<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> > >::_M_emplace_hint_unique<std::piecewise_construct_t const&, std::tuple<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&>, std::tuple<> >(std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> >, std::piecewise_construct_t const&, std::tuple<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const&>&&, std::tuple<>&&) (
    this=0x55555557f700 <StringsetParser::parsers[abi:cxx11]>, __pos=...) at /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_tree.h:2463
#6  std::map<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, StringsetParser*, std::less<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > >, std::allocator<std::pair<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > const, StringsetParser*> > >::operator[] (
    this=0x55555557f700 <StringsetParser::parsers[abi:cxx11]>, __k=...) at /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_map.h:513
#7  StringsetParser::save (name=..., this=<optimized out>) at /home/pemensik/upstream/ethq/ethq-0_6_3/parser.cc:29
#8  StringsetParser::save (this=this@entry=0x55555557f800 <nxp_daap2>, drivers=...)
    at /home/pemensik/upstream/ethq/ethq-0_6_3/parser.cc:24
#9  0x000055555555f1ce in StringsetParser::StringsetParser (drivers=..., this=<optimized out>)
    at /home/pemensik/upstream/ethq/ethq-0_6_3/parser.cc:19
#10 RegexParser::RegexParser (this=<optimized out>, drivers=..., total=..., queue=..., this=<optimized out>, 
    drivers=..., total=..., queue=...) at /home/pemensik/upstream/ethq/ethq-0_6_3/parser.cc:54
--Type <RET> for more, q to quit, c to continue without paging--
#11 0x000055555555ff12 in _sub_I_65535_0.0 ()
#12 0x00007ffff7a49cc4 in call_init (env=<optimized out>, argv=0x7fffffffddc8, argc=1) at ../csu/libc-start.c:145
#13 __libc_start_main_impl (main=0x55555555c4f0 <main(int, char**)>, argc=1, argv=0x7fffffffddc8, 
    init=<optimized out>, fini=<optimized out>, rtld_fini=<optimized out>, stack_end=0x7fffffffddb8)
    at ../csu/libc-start.c:347
#14 0x0000555555560de5 in _start ()

Spec URL: https://github.com/pemensik/ethq/raw/fedora/ethq.spec
SRPM URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/ethq-0.6.3-2.fc38.src.rpm

Disabled LTO and added very simple %check

Made a new scratch build, this time not crashing when started hopefully.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113252401

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7005487
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2263560-ethq/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07005487-ethq/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.

Created attachment 2016145 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 7005486 to 7005487

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7005486
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2263560-ethq/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07005486-ethq/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.

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]: 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]: 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: "Mozilla Public License 2.0", "*No copyright* Mozilla Public
     License 2.0", "Unknown or generated". 19 files have unknown license.
     Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/ethq/2263560-ethq/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: %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.
[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]: 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 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 1276 bytes in 1 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).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[!]: 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.
[!]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
     Note: %define requiring justification: %define _lto_cflags %{nil}
[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.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
     attached diff).
     See: (this test has no URL)
[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: ethq-0.6.3-2.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          ethq-debuginfo-0.6.3-2.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          ethq-debugsource-0.6.3-2.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          ethq-0.6.3-2.fc42.src.rpm
=============================================== 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
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp0bvt94so')]
checks: 32, packages: 4

ethq.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ethq
========= 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 16 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 3.9 s =========




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: ethq-debuginfo-0.6.3-2.fc42.x86_64.rpm
=============================================== 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
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpqk3bzy6n')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

========== 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 1.1 s =========





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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: 3

ethq.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ethq
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 13 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 3.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/isc-projects/ethq/archive/v0_6_3/ethq-0.6.3.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 2a237e6d04f777738881037cb93795de93f3aced996a0fdbfb6f6e603405cfac
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2a237e6d04f777738881037cb93795de93f3aced996a0fdbfb6f6e603405cfac


Requires
--------
ethq (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libncurses.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    libtinfo.so.6()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

ethq-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

ethq-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
ethq:
    ethq
    ethq(x86-64)

ethq-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    ethq-debuginfo
    ethq-debuginfo(x86-64)

ethq-debugsource:
    ethq-debugsource
    ethq-debugsource(x86-64)



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/ethq/2263560-ethq/srpm/ethq.spec      2024-10-24 06:50:35.335581457 +0300
+++ /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/ethq/2263560-ethq/srpm-unpacked/ethq.spec     2024-02-09 03:00:00.000000000 +0300
@@ -1,2 +1,12 @@
+## START: Set by rpmautospec
+## (rpmautospec version 0.3.8)
+## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog
+%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua:
+    release_number = 2;
+    base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}"));
+    print(release_number + base_release_number - 1);
+}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}}
+## END: Set by rpmautospec
+
 # it crashes with lto enabled on StringsetParser::parsers first modification
 %define _lto_cflags %{nil}
@@ -51,3 +61,12 @@
 
 %changelog
-%autochangelog 


Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2263560
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: fonts, Ocaml, Java, Perl, SugarActivity, Haskell, R, PHP, Python
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comments:
a) Is it possible ot change:
%define _lto_cflags %{nil}
to
%global _lto_cflags %{nil}
b) Can you update to latest release, 0.7.0
c) Smoke test is ok.
d) Please make fixes on import. Approved.

Package was never imported.
The ticket status is being reset, since creating the repository will require a fresh approval.
Let us know if you're still interested in this package.

Spec URL: https://github.com/pemensik/ethq/raw/fedora/ethq.spec
SRPM URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/srpm/ethq-0.7.0-1.fc44.src.rpm

OOps, did not realize this were waiting for my action. Updated to latest version.

Created attachment 2115269 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 7005487 to 9811946

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9811946
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2263560-ethq/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09811946-ethq/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.

Issues:
- (SHOULD) `%define _lto_cflags %{nil}` needs justification of usage of %define instead of %global.
- (EXTRA)  .spec and Spec inside SRPM are different. See diff at the end of review.


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

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


===== 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.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries
     with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible.
[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.
[x]: 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]: 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 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 1336 bytes in 1 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]: 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: Upstream does not provide signatures.
[?]: 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.
[!]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
     Note: %define requiring justification: %define _lto_cflags %{nil}
[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.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
     attached diff).
     See: (this test has no URL)
[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: ethq-0.7.0-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm
          ethq-0.7.0-1.fc44.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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/tmpox35vatt')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

ethq.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ethq
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: ethq-debuginfo-0.7.0-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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/tmpvyqtz8g2')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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: 2

ethq.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ethq
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 9 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/isc-projects/ethq/archive/v0_7_0/ethq-0.7.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 6e40d98d32abbe0915a7a8996edcdbae61a54bb1f34f2f8a5c9c8d3d2962ec23
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6e40d98d32abbe0915a7a8996edcdbae61a54bb1f34f2f8a5c9c8d3d2962ec23


Requires
--------
ethq (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libncurses.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    libtinfo.so.6()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)



Provides
--------
ethq:
    ethq
    ethq(x86-64)



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/fvorobev/Work/reviews/2263560-ethq/srpm/ethq.spec	2025-12-05 14:48:46.836753105 +0100
+++ /home/fvorobev/Work/reviews/2263560-ethq/srpm-unpacked/ethq.spec	2025-11-19 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
@@ -1,2 +1,12 @@
+## START: Set by rpmautospec
+## (rpmautospec version 0.8.1)
+## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog
+%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua:
+    release_number = 1;
+    base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}"));
+    print(release_number + base_release_number - 1);
+}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}}
+## END: Set by rpmautospec
+
 # it crashes with lto enabled on StringsetParser::parsers first modification
 %define _lto_cflags %{nil}
@@ -7,5 +17,5 @@
 Summary:        Ethernet NIC Queue stats viewer
 
-%global gitver %{lua:gv,n=string.gsub(macros.version, '[.]', '_');print(gv)}
+%global gitver %(echo %{version} | tr . _)
 
 License:        MPL-2.0
@@ -51,3 +61,15 @@
 
 %changelog
-%autochangelog 
+## START: Generated by rpmautospec
+* Wed Nov 19 2025 Petr Menšík <pemensik> - 0.7.0-1
+- Uncommitted changes
+
+* Fri Feb 09 2024 Petr Menšík <pemensik> - 0.6.3-2
+- Disable lto to prevent crashes
+
+* Fri Feb 09 2024 Petr Menšík <pemensik> - 0.6.3-1
+- Initial rpm package spec
+
+* Fri Feb 09 2024 Ray Bellis <github.me.uk>
+- RPMAUTOSPEC: unresolvable merge
+## END: Generated by rpmautospec


Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2263560
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Python, Haskell, C/C++, fonts, Perl, Java, Ocaml, R, PHP, SugarActivity
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

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