Bug 2274031

Spec URL: https://gist.github.com/aris-aiven/bd765d3d73f6da2d7b663904f4a0a510SRPM 
URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/tritas/msgspec/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07259804-python-msgspec/python-msgspec-0.18.6-1.fc41.src.rpm
Description: A fast serialization and validation library, with builtin support for JSON, MessagePack, YAML, and TOML
Fedora Account System Username: tritas

Spec URL: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/aris-aiven/bd765d3d73f6da2d7b663904f4a0a510/raw/7b7db9b656a253392404f73760d3a87c1cd33c83/python3-msgspec.spec
URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/tritas/msgspec/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07259804-python-msgspec/python-msgspec-0.18.6-1.fc41.src.rpm
Description: A fast serialization and validation library, with builtin support for JSON, MessagePack, YAML, and TOML
Fedora Account System Username: tritas

Spec URL: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/aris-aiven/bd765d3d73f6da2d7b663904f4a0a510/raw/5e592c82ab4288ef5f111c3276fd90ad1fda2118/python-msgspec.spec
URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/tritas/msgspec/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07259804-python-msgspec/python-msgspec-0.18.6-1.fc41.src.rpm
Description: A fast serialization and validation library, with builtin support for JSON, MessagePack, YAML, and TOML
Fedora Account System Username: tritas

It needs a few minor fixes, but with those fixes the package is APPROVED.
I will sponsor Aris.



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

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

Please add to %files section:
        %license LICENSE

Please change upstream url so the download is not "0.18.6.tar.gz"
but "msgspec-0.18.6.tar.gz, eg:
Source:         https://github.com/jcrist/%{pypi_name}/archive/refs/tags/%{version}/msgspec-%{version}.tar.gz

Please rename spec file to python-msgspec.spec (without the "3")

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

C/C++:
[-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
     Note: Sources not installed
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[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.
[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]: 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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
     upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD
     3-Clause License", "*No copyright* Public domain", "Apache License
     2.0", "MIT License", "Apache License 2.0 and/or Boost Software License
     1.0". 120 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck
     in /home/paul/2274031-python-msgspec/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/python3.12/site-packages,
     /usr/lib64/python3.12
[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.
[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 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 4425 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
     Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?)
[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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.

Needs to be included in %files section

[-]: 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:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Bad spec filename: /home/paul/2274031-python-msgspec/srpm-
     unpacked/python3-msgspec.spec
     See: (this test has no URL)
[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: python3-msgspec-0.18.6-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          python-msgspec-0.18.6-1.fc41.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/tmp4u_prl4g')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

python3-msgspec.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/msgspec/_core.cpython-312-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
python-msgspec.src: E: invalid-spec-name
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.9 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: 1

python3-msgspec.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/python3.12/site-packages/msgspec/_core.cpython-312-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s



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

Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/jcrist/msgspec/archive/refs/tags/0.18.6.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 5bff8c3f9303eb589516e02de4141ce31be09a0fdf4980734b020b64c120295e
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5bff8c3f9303eb589516e02de4141ce31be09a0fdf4980734b020b64c120295e


Requires
--------
python3-msgspec (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    python(abi)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)



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



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2274031
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, C/C++, Generic
Disabled plugins: fonts, Ocaml, PHP, Haskell, R, Perl, Java, SugarActivity
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/tritas/msgspec/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07309493-python-msgspec/python-msgspec.spec
URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/tritas/msgspec/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07309493-python-msgspec/python-msgspec-0.18.6-1.fc41.src.rpm
Description: A fast serialization and validation library, with builtin support for JSON, MessagePack, YAML, and TOML
Fedora Account System Username: tritas

Thank you for the review, and for kindly accepting to sponsor me!

The issues that were pointed out have been addressed in the latest COPR build (as linked in the comment above). 
The updated specfile and corresponding SRPM in COPR build successfully for versions 38 up to rawhide.

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-msgspec

FEDORA-2024-2d81d1fc73 (python-msgspec-0.18.6-7.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-2d81d1fc73

FEDORA-2024-2d81d1fc73 (python-msgspec-0.18.6-7.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.