Spec URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/sockperf/sockperf.spec SRPM URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/sockperf/sockperf-2.5.241-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: sockperf is a network benchmarking utility over socket API that was designed for testing performance (latency and throughput) of high-performance systems (it is also good for testing performance of regular networking systems as well). It covers most of the socket API calls and options. Specifically, in addition to the standard throughput tests, sockperf, does the following: * Measure latency of each discrete packet at sub-nanosecond resolution (using TSC register that counts CPU ticks with very low overhead). * Does the above for both ping-pong mode and for latency under load mode. This means that we measure latency of single packets even under load of millions Packets Per Second (without waiting for reply of packet before sending subsequent packet on time) * Enable spike analysis by providing histogram, with various percentiles of the packets’ latencies (for example: median, min, max, 99% percentile, and more), (this is in addition to average and standard deviation). Also, sockperf provides full log with all packet’s tx/rx times that can be further analyzed with external tools, such as MS-Excel or matplotlib - All this without affecting the benchmark itself. * Support MANY optional settings for good coverage of socket API and network configurations, while still keeping very low overhead in the fast path to allow cleanest results. Fedora Account System Username: michich
What's the rationale of BR git to apply the patches? You can try %autosetup macro: http://www.rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/Autosetup
I prefer having the prepped tree as a git tree for the same reasons the wiki page mentions: "The resulting build directory can be used for bisecting problems introduced in patches, and developing new patches from the build directory is more natural than with gendiff." As to why I am using a sequence of 6 git commands and not simply "%autosetup -S git": I have nicely git formatted patch files, but autosetup applies them internally using "git apply", thus losing the commit messages. Using "git am" gives better results. Applying patches this way is an often used idiom. systemd or xorg-x11-server are examples of Fedora packages that apply patches this way.
By the way, I've proposed a patch to make %autosetup usable for my purposes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1082038
I've updated the package: * Tue Apr 08 2014 Michal Schmidt <mschmidt> - 2.5.241-2 - Use %%autosetup. Spec URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/sockperf/sockperf.spec SRPM URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/sockperf/sockperf-2.5.241-2.fc21.src.rpm
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [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: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck: BSD (3 clause) -------------- sockperf-2.5.241/src/Client.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/Client.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/Defs.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/Defs.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/IoHandlers.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/IoHandlers.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/Message.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/Message.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/PacketTimes.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/PacketTimes.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/Playback.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/Playback.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/Server.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/Server.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/SockPerf.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/Switches.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/Ticks.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/Ticks.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/aopt.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/aopt.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/clock.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/common.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/common.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/os_abstract.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/os_abstract.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/ticks_os.h sockperf-2.5.241/src/vma-redirect.cpp sockperf-2.5.241/src/vma-redirect.h sockperf-2.5.241/tests/vma_multiplexers_test.sh sockperf-2.5.241/tests/vma_perf_envelope.sh Unknown or generated -------------------- sockperf-2.5.241/tests/avner-master-test.sh sockperf-2.5.241/tests/avner-test.sh [!]: %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. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. Note: Macros in: sockperf (description) [-]: 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. [!]: 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 235520 bytes in 42 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]: 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: [-]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag Note: Could not download Source0: https://sockperf.googlecode.com/files/sockperf-2.5.241.tar.gz See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags [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]: 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. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [x]: 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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [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. [x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Rpmlint ------- Checking: sockperf-2.5.241-2.fc21.i686.rpm sockperf-2.5.241-2.fc21.src.rpm sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US latencies -> lateness, enunciates, alienates sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tx -> TX, t, x sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rx -> Rx, ex, r sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matplotlib -> diplomatic sockperf.i686: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/sockperf/news sockperf.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark sockperf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark sockperf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US latencies -> lateness, enunciates, alienates sockperf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tx -> TX, t, x sockperf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rx -> Rx, ex, r sockperf.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matplotlib -> diplomatic sockperf.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch1: 0001-Don-t-throw-away-Fedora-s-CXXFLAGS.patch sockperf.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch2: 0002-drop-the-sockperf_-version-copy-of-the-binary.patch sockperf.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch3: 0003-doc-installation-fixes.patch sockperf.src: W: invalid-url Source0: https://sockperf.googlecode.com/files/sockperf-2.5.241.tar.gz <urlopen error [Errno 101] Network is unreachable> 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 16 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint sockperf sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US latencies -> lateness, enunciates, alienates sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tx -> TX, t, x sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rx -> Rx, ex, r sockperf.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US matplotlib -> diplomatic sockperf.i686: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/sockperf/news 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- sockperf (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6 libdl.so.2 libgcc_s.so.1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0) libm.so.6 libpthread.so.0 librt.so.1 libstdc++.so.6 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- sockperf: sockperf sockperf(x86-32) Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -rvn sockperf-2.5.241-2.fc21.src.rpm Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 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 -------------------------------- 1. /builddir/build/BUILD/sockperf-2.5.241/config/aux/missing: Unknown `--is-lightweight' option Try `/builddir/build/BUILD/sockperf-2.5.241/config/aux/missing --help' for more information configure: WARNING: 'missing' script is too old or missing Ask upstream to regenerate files. 2. Same for the doxygen files as #1. 3. g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I. -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -grecord-gcc-switches -m32 -march=i686 -mtune=atom -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -Werror -Wall --param inline-unit-growth=200 -D__LINUX__ -DVERSION=2.5.241 -O3 -DNDEBUG -g -O3 -c -o aopt.o aopt.cpp O3 and NDEBUG are unacceptable. You need to add a new patch. Others are fine.
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #5) > 1. /builddir/build/BUILD/sockperf-2.5.241/config/aux/missing: Unknown > `--is-lightweight' option > Try `/builddir/build/BUILD/sockperf-2.5.241/config/aux/missing --help' for > more information > configure: WARNING: 'missing' script is too old or missing > > Ask upstream to regenerate files. I run autoreconf in %prep, but the files in config/aux were not regenerated. Fixed now by calling it with '-f'. > 2. Same for the doxygen files as #1. I haven't talked about this with them yet, but yes, it is something to improve in upstream. > 3. g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. -I. -O2 -g -pipe -Wall > -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions > -fstack-protector-strong --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -grecord-gcc-switches > -m32 -march=i686 -mtune=atom -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -Werror -Wall > --param inline-unit-growth=200 -D__LINUX__ -DVERSION=2.5.241 -O3 -DNDEBUG > -g -O3 -c -o aopt.o aopt.cpp > > O3 and NDEBUG are unacceptable. You need to add a new patch. According to the packaging guidelies, using higher optimization levels would be acceptable if I could demonstrate significant speedup. Upstream may have had reasons for using these settings, but I do not have the data to show the benefit, so I adjusted patch 0001 to remove the '-O3' and '--param inline-unit-growth=200'. I disagree about '-DNDEBUG'. All it does is define the NDEBUG macro so that assert() calls are compiled into no code. That's a legitimate upstream's choice to make. New update: Spec URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/sockperf/sockperf.spec SRPM URL: http://michich.fedorapeople.org/sockperf/sockperf-2.5.241-3.fc21.src.rpm
PACKAGE APPROVED.
Thank you for the review, Christopher! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: sockperf Short Description: network benchmarking utility for testing latency and throughput Owners: michich Branches: f20 el6 epel7 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).