Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-posix-spawn.spec SRPM URL: http://ktdreyer.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-posix-spawn-0.3.8-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: posix-spawn uses posix_spawnp(2) for faster process spawning Fedora Account System Username: ktdreyer F21 scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6337090
i got it!
Spec is clean, only thing is those two warnings when installing it, that I have no clue what they mean: - no-soname - unused-direct-shlib-dependency Do you have any idea? Other than that and since they are only warnings, it's safe to say this package is approved. Also tried and it loaded fine in irb. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [-]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [-]: Package contains no static executables. [-]: 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]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [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: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 11 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/axil/review/1046956-rubygem-posix- spawn/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]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gems, /usr/share/gems/doc [-]: %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 %doc. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [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 [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]: 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]: 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]: 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 Ruby: [x]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform independent under %{gem_dir}. [x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage [x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated. [x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name} [x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel. [x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro. [x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi). [x]: Package contains Requires: ruby(release). ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [-]: 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. [x]: 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. [-]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: 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. Ruby: [x]: Gem should use %gem_install macro. [x]: Specfile should use macros from rubygem-devel package. [x]: Gem package should exclude cached Gem. [x]: Test suite of the library should be run. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [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: rubygem-posix-spawn-0.3.8-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm rubygem-posix-spawn-doc-0.3.8-1.fc21.noarch.rpm rubygem-posix-spawn-0.3.8-1.fc21.src.rpm rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) spawnp -> spawn, spawns, spawn p rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C posix_spawnp(2) for Ruby rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spawnp -> spawn, spawns, spawn p rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/posix-spawn-0.3.8/lib/posix_spawn_ext.so rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary posix-spawn-benchmark rubygem-posix-spawn.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) spawnp -> spawn, spawns, spawn p rubygem-posix-spawn.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C posix_spawnp(2) for Ruby rubygem-posix-spawn.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spawnp -> spawn, spawns, spawn p 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint rubygem-posix-spawn rubygem-posix-spawn-doc rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) spawnp -> spawn, spawns, spawn p rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C posix_spawnp(2) for Ruby rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US spawnp -> spawn, spawns, spawn p rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: no-soname /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/posix-spawn-0.3.8/lib/posix_spawn_ext.so rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/posix-spawn-0.3.8/lib/posix_spawn_ext.so /lib64/librt.so.1 rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/posix-spawn-0.3.8/lib/posix_spawn_ext.so /lib64/libdl.so.2 rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/posix-spawn-0.3.8/lib/posix_spawn_ext.so /lib64/libcrypt.so.1 rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/posix-spawn-0.3.8/lib/posix_spawn_ext.so /lib64/libm.so.6 rubygem-posix-spawn.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary posix-spawn-benchmark 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- rubygem-posix-spawn (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/env /usr/bin/ruby libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypt.so.1()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libruby.so.2.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) ruby(release) ruby(rubygems) rubygem-posix-spawn-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): rubygem-posix-spawn Provides -------- rubygem-posix-spawn: rubygem(posix-spawn) rubygem-posix-spawn rubygem-posix-spawn(x86-64) rubygem-posix-spawn-doc: rubygem-posix-spawn-doc Unversioned so-files -------------------- rubygem-posix-spawn: /usr/lib64/gems/ruby/posix-spawn-0.3.8/lib/posix_spawn_ext.so Source checksums ---------------- https://rubygems.org/gems/posix-spawn-0.3.8.gem : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2185d0834e8a097178caaffb4955245a0ae6195ad764804c8d9f0814e2771469 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2185d0834e8a097178caaffb4955245a0ae6195ad764804c8d9f0814e2771469 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1046956 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Ruby, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
You know(In reply to Achilleas Pipinellis from comment #2) > Spec is clean, only thing is those two warnings when installing it, that I > have no clue what they mean: > > - no-soname > - unused-direct-shlib-dependency > > Do you have any idea? I think these are acceptable since it's a rubygem package, but I don't know the details regarding why :( A lot of Ruby packages seem to have these warnings. Thanks a lot for the review! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-posix-spawn Short Description: posix_spawnp(2) for Ruby Owners: ktdreyer Branches: f20
Git done (by process-git-requests).
Built for Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6495987 Closing. Thank you again.