Bug 658611

spec file, tarball and srpm are at: 

https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/

I have run rpmlint against spec file, srpm and all generated rpms, and have come across only one error as shown below.  I'm not sure how to fix this - and I'm hoping the reviewer can point in the right direction.


nuxwdog-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
This debuginfo package appears to contain debug symbols but no source files.
This is often a sign of binaries being unexpectedly stripped too early during
the build, or being compiled without compiler debug flags (which again often
is a sign of distro's default compiler flags ignored which might have security
consequences), or other compiler flags which result in rpmbuild's debuginfo
extraction not working as expected.  Verify that the binaries are not
unexpectedly stripped and that the intended compiler flags are used.

Spec URL: https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog.spec
SRPM URL: https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog-1.0.0-6.fc13.src.rpm

debuginfo-without-sources usually indicates that the package doesn't build with the proper compiler flags.  The spec sets them twice (once manually and again implicitly with the %configure macro) and it looks like they make it onto the compiler command line so I'm not sure what's up.  Unfortunately the package from comment 2 fails to build for me:

perl Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor && make -f Makefile.real all
Can't locate ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm in @INC (@INC contains: /usr/local/lib64/perl5 /usr/local/share/perl5 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/lib64/perl5 /usr/share/perl5 .) at Makefile.PL line 24.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at Makefile.PL line 24.

Looks like a missing build dependency.

(In reply to comment #3)
> debuginfo-without-sources usually indicates that the package doesn't build with
> the proper compiler flags.  The spec sets them twice (once manually and again
> implicitly with the %configure macro) and it looks like they make it onto the
> compiler command line so I'm not sure what's up.  Unfortunately the package
> from comment 2 fails to build for me:
> 
> perl Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor && make -f Makefile.real all
> Can't locate ExtUtils/MakeMaker.pm in @INC (@INC contains:
> /usr/local/lib64/perl5 /usr/local/share/perl5 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl
> /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl /usr/lib64/perl5 /usr/share/perl5 .) at
> Makefile.PL line 24.
> BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at Makefile.PL line 24.
> 
> Looks like a missing build dependency.

It needs perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)

I have added the additional dependency on perl(ExtUtils::Makemaker) and removed the (redundant) manual setting of the compiler flags.

It turns out that the issue where the debuginfo files lacks sources was due to an error in a build script in my svn repo.  If you use the srpm to rebuild - the  debuginfo rpm builds just fine (with all sources).

So - at this point, there are no errors or warnings reported by rpmlint.

The new stuff is located at:

Spec URL: https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog.spec

SRPM URL:
https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog-1.0.0-7.fc13.src.rpm

Created attachment 464496 [details]
This patch will clean spec as per current packaging guidelines.

1) This patch takes care of using common style of macros
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS
and
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros

2)subpackages used to install main package so put common docs files in main package only.

3) Don't use Copyright for spec and vendor tag.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Tags

I see some issues with perl module licensing and then main package license.

Please correct the license for perl module in source .pm file.

Attached new spec file and srpm.  

As the perl module makes no sense outside of nuxwdog, and there is little chance of it being published on CPAN or as an extension to the perl language, I have chosen to make the license for the perl module match the other components (LGPLv2)

The README file has been modified accordingly.

New spec and sprm at:

https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog-1.0.0-8.fc13.src.rpm
https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog.spec

Attached new spec file and srpm.

So - as you pointed out on #irc, there is one part of the perl module (ppport.h) which has the "same as perl" license.  So, I have decided to make the remaining parts of the perl module GPL+ so that they will have the same "Same as perl" designation.

The spec file has been updated accordingly, and I added a perl license file.

New spec and sprm at:

https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog-1.0.0-9.fc13.src.rpm
https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog.spec

"Same as perl" is "GPL+ or Artistic", not just "GPL+".

Of course, this is compatible with "GPL+" so there's no need to change anything but it won't be "Same as perl".

I've changed the perl module licensing to say "same as perl".

Also, fixed a library reference in the perl build (as pointed out by Parag) Thanks Parag!

New spec and rpm at:

https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog-1.0.0-10.fc13.src.rpm
https://fedorahosted.org/released/nuxwdog/nuxwdog.spec

Looks Good now.

APPROVED this package.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: nuxwdog
Short Description: nuxwdog watchdog server
Owners: kwright
Branches: F-13, F-14, EL-5
InitialCC: ausil

Git done (by process-git-requests).

Did you also want a EPEL-6 branch?

Kevin, thanks for the quick response. We don't need EPEL-6 at this time.

Fixing the component, which probably got changed by mistake.