Spec URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline.spec SRPM URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: Powerline is a statusline plugin for vim, and provides statuslines and prompts for several other applications, including zsh, bash, tmux, IPython, Awesome and Qtile. https://github.com/Lokaltog/powerline Fedora Account System Username: asn
rpmlint complaints | powerline.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zsh -> sh, ssh, ash | powerline.src: W: invalid-url Source0: powerline-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc.tar.gz | 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. 1 is obviously bogus however 2 indicates some errors: - Source0 is supposed to be the URL where to find the package, I suppose the git tree when it is a checkout ? - you should use %{checkout} in Version and set Checkout: 20131123gitdb80fc, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages
* Sun Nov 24 2013 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-2 - Set checkout. - Set source url - Fix default configuration path. The spelling error is no error.
Thanks for this package ;) Just a drive-by comment as a happy powerline user. You need to add python2-devel or python3-devel in the BuildRequires: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires
I don't see why python-devel is needed.
Here is a koji build with latest Andreas' package: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6220268 The only thing in the specfile that might need changing is that subpackages (vim-plugin-powerline and tmux-powerline) should require the main package with full NVR.
python-devel is not needed, powerline is written entirely in Python, python-devel is normally needed for python bindings.
Well I guess the Python guidelines need an update or fedora-review needs fixing then
1. Please sort your spec for readability: Move: BuildRequires: python-setuptools python-sphinx fdupes fontconfig tmux vim-minimal BuildArch: noarch after Url: https://github.com/Lokaltog/powerline 2. %define checkout 20131123gitdb80fc --> %global checkout 20131123gitdb80fc And ask upstream to tag the project. 3. %build Add a note like #nothing to build. 4. install with -p option to preserve the timestamp. 5. %fdupes %{buildroot}%{python_sitelib} What's this crap? 6. Just one line in %files: %{_datadir}/%{name} No need to %dir %{_datadir}/%{name} %{_datadir}/%{name}/fontpatcher-symbols.sfd 7. python setup.py install --prefix=%{_prefix} --root=%{buildroot} --optimize=1 Use: %{__python2} setup.py install --prefix=%{_prefix} --root=%{buildroot} --optimize=1
Thanks for your comment. 1. Moved BuildArch, prefer BuildRequires on top! 2. done 3. done 4. -a now 5. no crap (man fdupes) 6. wont change, I prefer two or more 7. done
- .spec file and src rpm are not contiguous. - %{_datadir}/vim/site|plugin directories are not owned - Why not using %{name} instead of powerline in the Require tags ? - You can use the commit direct download link for Source0 https://github.com/Lokaltog/powerline/archive/db80fc95ed01d2c559c4bdc7da8514ed3cc7fcd9.zip - Please, leave a comment or an upstream link about the patches > I see a BuildRoot tag so if your package must be built in EPEL5 too: - Buildroot is not like those proposed by EPEL packaging guidelines for EPEL5 and below (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging#BuildRoot_tag) and - BuildRoot cleanings are missing - 'fdupes' is not in EPEL* - Consider that %{__python2} macro could not work - In RHEL 5 and older, python2 packages that install python modules need to define python_sitelib/python_sitearch macros See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros > else - Remove Buildroot tag Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel ===== 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". 85 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1033961-powerline/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/vim/site/plugin, /usr/share/vim/site [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/vim/site, /usr/share/vim/site/plugin [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]: 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 860160 bytes in 81 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 %doc. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: No %config files under /usr. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [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 Python: [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]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag Note: Could not download Source0 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags [!]: Buildroot is not present Note: Invalid buildroot found: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-build See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag [x]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages. Note: Package contains font files [-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in powerline- docs , vim-plugin-powerline , tmux-powerline [ ]: 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. [!]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [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. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [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: 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 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: powerline-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-1.fc21.noarch.rpm powerline-docs-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-1.fc21.noarch.rpm vim-plugin-powerline-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-1.fc21.noarch.rpm tmux-powerline-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-1.fc21.noarch.rpm powerline-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-1.fc21.src.rpm powerline.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/plugin/__init__.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/matchers/plugin/__init__.py powerline.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/__init__.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/plugin/__init__.py powerline.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/matchers/__init__.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/__init__.py powerline.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary powerline powerline.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary powerline-fontpatcher powerline.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary powerline-lint tmux-powerline.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conf -> con, cone, cons powerline.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zsh -> sh, ssh, ash powerline.src: W: invalid-url Source0: powerline-0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc.tar.gz 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint powerline powerline-docs vim-plugin-powerline tmux-powerline powerline.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/plugin/__init__.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/matchers/plugin/__init__.py powerline.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/__init__.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/plugin/__init__.py powerline.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/matchers/__init__.py /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/powerline/segments/__init__.py powerline.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary powerline powerline.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary powerline-fontpatcher powerline.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary powerline-lint tmux-powerline.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conf -> con, cone, cons 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- powerline (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/env /usr/bin/python config(powerline) fontconfig python python(abi) powerline-docs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): vim-plugin-powerline (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): powerline vim tmux-powerline (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): powerline tmux Provides -------- powerline: config(powerline) font(powerlinesymbols) powerline powerline-docs: powerline-docs vim-plugin-powerline: vim-plugin-powerline tmux-powerline: tmux-powerline Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/sagitter/1033961-powerline/srpm/powerline.spec 2013-11-26 18:16:28.846746684 +0100 +++ /home/sagitter/1033961-powerline/srpm-unpacked/powerline.spec 2013-11-24 21:33:24.000000000 +0100 @@ -1,9 +1,8 @@ BuildRequires: python-setuptools python-sphinx fdupes fontconfig tmux vim-minimal - -%global checkout 20131123gitdb80fc +BuildArch: noarch Name: powerline -Version: 0.0.1.%{checkout} -Release: 3%{?dist} +Version: 0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc +Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: The ultimate status-line/prompt utility @@ -12,10 +11,8 @@ Url: https://github.com/Lokaltog/powerline -BuildArch: noarch - Requires: python Requires: fontconfig -Source0: https://github.com/Lokaltog/powerline/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz +Source0: %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz Patch0: fontpatcher.py.patch @@ -38,5 +35,5 @@ Summary: Powerline VIM plugin Requires: vim -Requires: powerline = %{version}-%{release} +Requires: powerline %description -n vim-plugin-powerline @@ -47,5 +44,5 @@ Summary: Powerline for tmux Requires: tmux -Requires: powerline = %{version}-%{release} +Requires: powerline %description -n tmux-powerline @@ -64,9 +61,8 @@ %build -# nothing to build %install sed -i -e "/DEFAULT_SYSTEM_CONFIG_DIR/ s@None@'/etc/xdg'@" powerline/__init__.py -%{__python2} setup.py install --prefix=%{_prefix} --root=%{buildroot} --optimize=1 +python setup.py install --prefix=%{_prefix} --root=%{buildroot} --optimize=1 # build docs @@ -84,5 +80,5 @@ # config install -d -m0755 %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/xdg/%{name} -cp -a powerline/config_files/* %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/xdg/%{name}/ +cp -r powerline/config_files/* %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/xdg/%{name}/ # fonts @@ -133,13 +129,4 @@ %changelog -* Mon Nov 25 2013 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-3 -- Changed define to global -- Moved BuildArch - -* Sun Nov 24 2013 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-2 -- Set checkout. -- Set source URL. -- Fix default configuration path. - * Sun Nov 24 2013 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-1 - Initial package. Generated by fedora-review 0.5.0 (920221d) last change: 2013-08-30 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1033961 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, SugarActivity, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EPEL5, EXARCH, DISTTAG
* Wed Nov 27 2013 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.0.1.20131123gitdb80fc-4 - Added missing vim directories. - Fixed BuildRoot. - Use fdupes only on Fedora. - Use name tag in Requires.
Above all, please, when you change your src package then post the new links to .spec/src.rpm. Reviewer needs them for using 'fedora-review' tool (in fact, note my previous comment ".spec file and src rpm are not contiguous."). - Why BuildRequires tag is so much high in the file ? - I do still not see any comment for the patches. ;) - %{checkout} goes in the Release tag. See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Release_Tag - Your package cannot be built in EPEL yet. I advice you to check it in koji when it's ready ... and to post the links. :)
Spec URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline.spec SRPM URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline-0.0.1-5.20131123gitdb80fc.fc19.src.rpm * Wed Nov 27 2013 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.0.1-5.20131123gitdb80fc - Remove fontpatcher.py.patch - Moved BuildReqruies. - Try to fix build on EPEL5. a) There is only one patch and the comment would be the same as the filename, so I don't really see why to add a comment. b) Why does it need to work on EPEL5. Is this a requirement for Fedora? If yes, since when?
(In reply to Andreas Schneider from comment #13) > Spec URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline.spec > SRPM URL: > http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline-0.0.1-5.20131123gitdb80fc. > fc19.src.rpm > b) Why does it need to work on EPEL5. Is this a requirement for Fedora? If > yes, since when? In comment#10, I written: > ... if your package must be built in EPEL5 too: It's up to you! It's not a requirement for Fedora and I didn't say that it was.
Ah ok, cause on EPEL5 python fails in the setup and on EPEL6 it fails compiling the documentation. So I would prefer not to have them on EPEL.
(In reply to Andreas Schneider from comment #15) > So I would prefer not to have them on EPEL. You don't need BuildRoot and %if 0%{?rhel} && 0%{?rhel} <= 5 %{!?python_sitelib: %global python_sitelib %(%{__python} -c "from distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib())")} %{!?python_sitearch: %global python_sitearch %(%{__python} -c "from distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib(1))")} %endif anymore. Not even of the '%if 0%{?fedora}' conditional line for fdupes and %{buildroot} cleaning in %install section.
* Thu Nov 28 2013 - Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc - Remove EPEL support. Spec URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline.spec SRPM URL: http://xor.cryptomilk.org/rpm/powerline/powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc19.src.rpm
Remove BuildRoot line. Package approved !
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: powerline Short Description: The ultimate status-line/prompt utility Owners: asn Branches: f19 f20 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc20
powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc19
powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository.
powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.
powerline-0.0.1-6.20131123gitdb80fc.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.