Bug 1074128 - Review Request: libserialport - Library for accessing serial ports
Summary: Review Request: libserialport - Library for accessing serial ports
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-03-08 04:51 UTC by Alex G.
Modified: 2020-11-05 09:44 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-09-20 13:39:53 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
jamielinux: fedora-review+
upstream-release-monitoring: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Alex G. 2014-03-08 04:51:40 UTC
Spec URL: http://gtech.myftp.org/~mrnuke/fedrev/libserialport-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae/libserialport.spec
SRPM URL: http://gtech.myftp.org/~mrnuke/fedrev/libserialport-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae/libserialport-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae.fc20.src.rpm
Description:
libserialport is a minimal library written in C that is intended to take care
of the OS-specific details when writing software that uses serial ports.

By writing your serial code to use libserialport, you enable it to work
transparently on any platform supported by the library.

The operations that are supported are:

- Port enumeration (obtaining a list of serial ports on the system).
- Opening and closing ports.
- Setting port parameters (baud rate, parity, etc).
- Reading, writing and flushing data.
- Obtaining error information.

Fedora Account System Username: mrnuke

Additional info:
libserialport has not yet seen an official release. That will probably happen around the same time with a new libsigrok release. I want to get this package in before that happens, as libsigrok will depend on this package.

Comment 1 Jamie Nguyen 2014-03-12 11:51:10 UTC
Package Review
==============

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


Issues
======

(1) [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.

The -doc subpackage does not include a copy of the license.



(2) [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.

jquery.js is bundled with -doc subpackage.

There is an open Review Request for jQuery and a Change proposal:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/jQuery

However, I'm not sure what the status is regarding new Review Requests that are bundling jquery.js before the jQuery package is actually available. Toshio said here that packages must now begin following the web asset guidelines:

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2013-August/187836.html
Toshio wrote this:
> * Fedora also has rules about not bundling code from other upstreams into
>  a package.  These rules have just been updated to include web assets
>  (javascript, flash, css, common images would all fall under this).
>  fusioncharts free (as well as the jquery libraries and potentially some of
>  the other things in the AUTHORS file) should likely be packaged in its own
>  package for this reason.
>  
>  ... snip ...
>
>  Packages under review must begin following these guidelines at once.


I'm aware that many current packages already in Fedora that use Doxygen to generate their documentation are already bundling jquery.js, but I advise that you open an FPC ticket to clarify what the official guidelines are. You may need to open a bundling exception.



(3) [!]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
         Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments

See guidelines here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL

You need to document how you generated the Source0 tarball.



(4) The tarball has the extension .tar.gz but is actually a zip file.

Please correct the file extension.



===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[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:
     "LGPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/mockbuild/review/libserialport/licensecheck.txt
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[!]: 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 20480 bytes in 2 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 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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: 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
     libserialport-doc
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[!]: 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]: 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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     arched.
[x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libserialport-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae.fc21.x86_64.rpm
          libserialport-devel-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae.fc21.x86_64.rpm
          libserialport-doc-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae.fc21.noarch.rpm
          libserialport-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae.fc21.src.rpm
libserialport-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libserialport.src: W: invalid-url Source0: libserialport-0.1.0.tar.gz
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint libserialport libserialport-devel libserialport-doc
libserialport-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
libserialport (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /sbin/ldconfig
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libudev.so.1()(64bit)
    libudev.so.1(LIBUDEV_183)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libserialport-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    libserialport(x86-64)
    libserialport.so.0()(64bit)
    pkgconfig(libudev)

libserialport-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
libserialport:
    libserialport
    libserialport(x86-64)
    libserialport.so.0()(64bit)

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

libserialport-doc:
    libserialport-doc



Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13
Command line :/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -r -n ../libserialport-0.1.0-0.2.20140110git3ceb8ae.fc20.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

Comment 2 Jamie Nguyen 2014-03-12 11:53:44 UTC
(5) Empty "%doc" macro in "%files devel"

This should be removed.

Comment 3 Alex G. 2014-03-12 16:11:11 UTC
> (1) [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
> 
> The -doc subpackage does not include a copy of the license.
>
OOOPs. It should depend on the base package. 

> (2) [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
> 
> jquery.js is bundled with -doc subpackage.
> 
It seems those new guidelines were rushed out without proper thought and solutions. I don't know how to kill this unless I kill the -doc subpackage.

> (3) [!]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
>          Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
> 
Sure.

> (4) The tarball has the extension .tar.gz but is actually a zip file.
> 
The git-archive skills are weak with this one (me). Will fix as well.

> (5) Empty "%doc" macro in "%files devel" 
> 
Sure thing.

Comment 4 Alex G. 2014-03-12 17:52:10 UTC
New SPEC: http://gtech.myftp.org/~mrnuke/fedrev/libserialport-0.1.0-0.3.20140110git3ceb8ae/libserialport.spec
New SRPM: http://gtech.myftp.org/~mrnuke/fedrev/libserialport-0.1.0-0.3.20140110git3ceb8ae/libserialport-0.1.0-0.3.20140110git3ceb8ae.fc20.src.rpm

---

I have no idea what to do about the jquery issue, so I did not address that yet. All other issues should be fixed. I've opened up an fpc ticket for this issue [1].

[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/406

Comment 5 Dan Horák 2014-03-13 12:07:49 UTC
few notes:
- it makes no sense to create a separate -doc subpackage with 150 KB of content caused largely by the bundled jquery. For a future release I'd merge it with the -devel subpackage and for now (bundled jquery) I'd omit it completely
- there is no need to silence bogus fedora-review warnings like the smp_flags in the "make docs"
- make the build verbose (use make V=1 or disable silent rules when calling configure), so one can check the flags passed to the compiler

Comment 6 Alex G. 2014-03-15 21:34:12 UTC
FPC bundling-exception request ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/408

(In reply to Dan Horák from comment #5)
> few notes:
> - it makes no sense to create a separate -doc subpackage with 150 KB of
> content caused largely by the bundled jquery. For a future release I'd merge
> it with the -devel subpackage and for now (bundled jquery) I'd omit it
> completely

I don't like it when documentation is forcefully included in a -devel package. Most common use of -devel packages is to compile some other piece of software. In such cases, documentation is not needed.

> - there is no need to silence bogus fedora-review warnings like the
> smp_flags in the "make docs"

OK.

> - make the build verbose (use make V=1 or disable silent rules when calling
> configure), so one can check the flags passed to the compiler

OK.

Comment 7 Jamie Nguyen 2014-06-28 14:49:13 UTC
Bundling exception was approved. Please add the appropriate Provides.

Comment 9 Dan Horák 2014-08-22 15:07:18 UTC
Jamie, could you finish the review? It blocks updating to new sigrok release.

Comment 10 Dan Horák 2014-09-05 16:59:53 UTC
Alex, shall I take over the review when Jamie is not responding?

Comment 11 Jamie Nguyen 2014-09-13 08:24:24 UTC
Extremely sorry for the delay and lack of reply :(
$LIFE stuff shifted many priorities..

Continuing review process now!

Comment 12 Jamie Nguyen 2014-09-13 09:48:30 UTC
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]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[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:
     "LGPL (v3 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)". Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/mockbuild/libserialport/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 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 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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[x]: 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
     libserialport-doc
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-]: 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]: 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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libserialport-0.1.0-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm
          libserialport-devel-0.1.0-1.fc22.x86_64.rpm
          libserialport-doc-0.1.0-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
          libserialport-0.1.0-1.fc22.src.rpm
libserialport-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libserialport-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint libserialport libserialport-devel libserialport-doc
libserialport-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libserialport-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
libserialport (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /sbin/ldconfig
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libudev.so.1()(64bit)
    libudev.so.1(LIBUDEV_183)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

libserialport-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/pkg-config
    libserialport(x86-64)
    libserialport.so.0()(64bit)
    pkgconfig(libudev)

libserialport-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libserialport



Provides
--------
libserialport:
    bundled(jquery)
    libserialport
    libserialport(x86-64)
    libserialport.so.0()(64bit)

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

libserialport-doc:
    libserialport-doc



Source checksums
----------------
http://sigrok.org/download/source/libserialport/libserialport-0.1.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : ec905bd64bd8b82234b68a5eded5fd79b67704fe0cd73bf092666b9679a319af
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ec905bd64bd8b82234b68a5eded5fd79b67704fe0cd73bf092666b9679a319af


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14
Command line :/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -r -n ./libserialport-0.1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

Comment 13 Jamie Nguyen 2014-09-13 09:49:19 UTC
Package approved!

Comment 14 Dan Horák 2014-09-19 16:38:18 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: libserialport
Short Description: Library for accessing serial ports
Upstream URL: http://sigrok.org/wiki/Libserialport
Owners: mrnuke sharkcz
Branches: f19 f20 f21 epel7
InitialCC:

Comment 15 Upstream Release Monitoring 2014-09-19 16:48:35 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 16 Dan Horák 2014-09-20 13:39:53 UTC
imported and built


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.