Bug 2389366

This package built on koji:  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=136231385

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9444099
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2389366-rust-rangemap/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09444099-rust-rangemap/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.

The package is APPROVED. I send a PR upstream for the file excludes. Please see the discussion below.

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

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

The spec file is generated by rust2rpm, simplifying the review.

I noted two modifications of the default output.

  -%bcond check 1
  +# * missing dev-dependencies: permutator ^0.4, test-strategy ^0.3.1
  +%bcond check 0

It would be nice to have these tests enabled, but it’s acceptable to decide not
to package (at least) two extra dependencies solely to run the tests.

It looks like most or all of the tests do require these dependencies, so it’s
not worthwhile to try to patch them out and run a subset of the tests, as I
might suggest if these crates wer only used in one or two places.
 
  +%exclude %{crate_instdir}/bors.toml
  +%exclude %{crate_instdir}/pre_commit.sh

Excluding these files makes sense. The first is probably harmless but is
related to CI configuration, so it is also useless. The second is related to CI
and would bring in an unwanted dependency on bash.

I suggested these exclusions (and a few more) upstream in
https://github.com/jeffparsons/rangemap/pull/108; you may want to add a link to
that PR.

I notice that two packaged features require nightly compilers:

  # So we can run doc tests from "README.md".
  nightly = []
  # Enables `RangeMap::new()`, `RangeInclusiveMap::new()`, `RangeSet::new()`,
  # and `RangeInclusiveSet::new()` to be const functions.
  # Requires a nightly compiler because `const_btree_new` is an unstable feature,
  # but is soon to be stabilized: <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/71835>
  const_fn = []

I suppose it is up to you whether you expose these as metapackages.


Issues:
=======
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
  Note: warning: File listed twice:
  /usr/share/cargo/registry/rangemap-1.6.0/CHANGELOG.md
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_duplicate_files

  OK; due to a reasonable rust2rpm design decision.


===== 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",
     "MIT License". 22 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2389366-rust-
     rangemap/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[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: No rpmlint messages.
[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]: 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in rust-
     rangemap-devel , rust-rangemap+default-devel , rust-rangemap+const_fn-
     devel , rust-rangemap+nightly-devel , rust-rangemap+quickcheck-devel ,
     rust-rangemap+serde-devel , rust-rangemap+serde1-devel
[?]: Package functions as described.

     Tests are not run.

[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.

     https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=136231385

[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.

     Tests are not run; additional dependencies would be required, which is an
     adequate reason for disabling them. It would be nice to enable them,
     though.

[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 all installed packages.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: rust-rangemap-devel-1.6.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-rangemap+default-devel-1.6.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-rangemap+const_fn-devel-1.6.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-rangemap+nightly-devel-1.6.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-rangemap+quickcheck-devel-1.6.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-rangemap+serde-devel-1.6.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-rangemap+serde1-devel-1.6.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-rangemap-1.6.0-1.fc44.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.7.0
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
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpfs9piqkb')]
checks: 32, packages: 8

 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 43 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s 




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.7.0
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: 7

 7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 39 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/rangemap/1.6.0/download#/rangemap-1.6.0.crate :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : f93e7e49bb0bf967717f7bd674458b3d6b0c5f48ec7e3038166026a69fc22223
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f93e7e49bb0bf967717f7bd674458b3d6b0c5f48ec7e3038166026a69fc22223


Requires
--------
rust-rangemap-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    rust

rust-rangemap+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(rangemap)

rust-rangemap+const_fn-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(rangemap)

rust-rangemap+nightly-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(rangemap)

rust-rangemap+quickcheck-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(quickcheck/default) >= 1.0.3 with crate(quickcheck/default) < 2.0.0~)
    cargo
    crate(rangemap)

rust-rangemap+serde-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(serde/default) >= 1.0.0 with crate(serde/default) < 2.0.0~)
    cargo
    crate(rangemap)

rust-rangemap+serde1-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(rangemap)
    crate(rangemap/serde)



Provides
--------
rust-rangemap-devel:
    crate(rangemap)
    rust-rangemap-devel

rust-rangemap+default-devel:
    crate(rangemap/default)
    rust-rangemap+default-devel

rust-rangemap+const_fn-devel:
    crate(rangemap/const_fn)
    rust-rangemap+const_fn-devel

rust-rangemap+nightly-devel:
    crate(rangemap/nightly)
    rust-rangemap+nightly-devel

rust-rangemap+quickcheck-devel:
    crate(rangemap/quickcheck)
    rust-rangemap+quickcheck-devel

rust-rangemap+serde-devel:
    crate(rangemap/serde)
    rust-rangemap+serde-devel

rust-rangemap+serde1-devel:
    crate(rangemap/serde1)
    rust-rangemap+serde1-devel



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2389366
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: Perl, Ocaml, Haskell, PHP, Java, R, Python, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Thank you for the review and the upstream PR!

Yes, I think it makes sense to "hide" the features which require nightly compilers.

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-rangemap

Imported and built:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-1cd1c61e17