Bug 2407364

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9749037
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2407364-rtrlib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09749037-rtrlib/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]: 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.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT
     License", "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "*No copyright* GNU
     General Public License, Version 2", "GNU General Public License v3.0
     or later", "BSD 3-Clause License", "*No copyright* Apache License
     2.0", "BSD 2-Clause License". 63 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/mosvald/mruprich-review/review-
     rtrlib/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: 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]: 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 23736 bytes in 3 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 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:
[-]: 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 rtrlib-
     devel , rtr-tools
[?]: 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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[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: rtrlib-0.8.0-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm
          rtrlib-devel-0.8.0-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm
          rtrlib-doc-0.8.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rtr-tools-0.8.0-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm
          rtrlib-0.8.0-1.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/tmp7xdni2r_')]
checks: 32, packages: 5

rtr-tools.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rpki', '%description -l en_US rpki -> kipper')
rtr-tools.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rov', '%description -l en_US rov -> riv, rob, rove')
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings, 24 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.3 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: rtrlib-debuginfo-0.8.0-1.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/tmp0digcjzq')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 10 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: 5

rtr-tools.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rpki', '%description -l en_US rpki -> kipper')
rtr-tools.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('rov', '%description -l en_US rov -> riv, rob, rove')
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings, 33 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.3 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/rtrlib/rtrlib/archive/refs/tags/v0.8.0/rtrlib-0.8.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 8cc99343dc3ea8908cd9710ba1f72a1ddce591bf80bfd7d656dbc4568f560ada
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8cc99343dc3ea8908cd9710ba1f72a1ddce591bf80bfd7d656dbc4568f560ada


Requires
--------
rtrlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libssh
    libssh.so.4()(64bit)
    libssh.so.4(LIBSSH_4_5_0)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

rtrlib-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    librtr.so.0()(64bit)
    libssh-devel
    rtrlib

rtrlib-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    rtrlib

rtr-tools (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    librtr.so.0()(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)
    rtrlib



Provides
--------
rtrlib:
    librtr.so.0()(64bit)
    rtrlib
    rtrlib(x86-64)

rtrlib-devel:
    pkgconfig(rtrlib)
    rtrlib-devel
    rtrlib-devel(x86-64)

rtrlib-doc:
    rtrlib-doc

rtr-tools:
    rtr-tools
    rtr-tools(x86-64)



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

Apart from the missing _isa in sub-packages' 'Requires:' (%{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}), it looks good!

Cosmetical stuff:

There is extra dot in the Description:

📦[mosvald@rawhide-review ~]$ rpm -qi rtrlib-doc
Name        : rtrlib-doc
Version     : 0.8.0
Release     : 1.fc44
Architecture: noarch
Install Date: Fri 31 Oct 2025 03:13:13 PM CET
Group       : Development/Libraries
Size        : 901976
License     : MIT AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause
Signature   : (none)
Source RPM  : rtrlib-0.8.0-1.fc44.src.rpm
Build Date  : Fri 31 Oct 2025 03:09:39 PM CET
Build Host  : dynamic-2a00-1028-83a0-a846-fb63-60b3-2b7e-338c.ipv6.o2.cz
URL         : http://rpki.realmv6.org/
Summary     : Small extensible RPKI-RTR-Client C library. Documentation
Description :
RTRlib is an open-source C implementation of the  RPKI/Router Protocol
client. The library allows one to fetch and store validated prefix origin
data from a RTR-cache and performs origin verification of prefixes. It
supports different types of transport sessions (e.g., SSH, unprotected TCP)
and is easily extendable.
.  <<<=== HERE
This package contains documentation files.
📦[mosvald@rawhide-review ~]$

rpki-rov should start with capital R after the dot:

📦[mosvald@rawhide-review ~]$ rpm -qi rtr-tools
Name        : rtr-tools
Version     : 0.8.0
Release     : 1.fc44
Architecture: x86_64
Install Date: Fri 31 Oct 2025 03:13:13 PM CET
Group       : Development/Libraries
Size        : 84325
License     : MIT AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-2-Clause AND BSD-3-Clause
Signature   : (none)
Source RPM  : rtrlib-0.8.0-1.fc44.src.rpm
Build Date  : Fri 31 Oct 2025 03:09:39 PM CET
Build Host  : dynamic-2a00-1028-83a0-a846-fb63-60b3-2b7e-338c.ipv6.o2.cz
URL         : http://rpki.realmv6.org/
Summary     : RPKI-RTR command line tools
Description :
Tools for the RTRlib
Rtrclient is command line that connects to an RPKI-RTR server and prints
protocol information and information about the fetched ROAs to the console.
rpki-rov is a command line tool that connects to an RPKI-RTR server and   <<<=== HERE
allows to validate given IP prefixes and origin ASes.
📦[mosvald@rawhide-review ~]$

Thank you Martin! I've added your points in the specfile. Not sure if another review-tool run is needed?

https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mruprich/rtrlib/build/9760023/

No need to do it again. I just checked the new spec, and the issue with _isa is fixed, giving this the fedora-review+ flag. Nice work!

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

Package already in Fedora, closing.