Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity.spec SRPM URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity-0.1.0-2.fc20.src.rpm Description: 'affinity' provides a simple api for setting the processor affinity by wrapping the specific underlying function calls of each platform. works on Windows (requires pywin32) and linux (kernel 2.6 or patched 2.4) Fedora Account System Username: nb
Will you support RHEL5(ships python 2.4)? If not remove those obsoleted macros and tags.
Hey Nick, We talked about this on IRC a bit; if you have an updated package I'll be happy to take the review if Christopher happens to be busy at the time.
I'm back, please answer my question in comment 1.
I do not plan to build for EPEL 5. I will remove the old macros and tags shortly.
Updated Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity.spec SRPM URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity-0.1.0-3.fc20.src.rpm
Christopher, any update on this review?
(In reply to Nick Bebout from comment #6) > Christopher, any update on this review? You didn't remove the obsolete stuffs.
Sorry, I didn't mean to WONTFIX this. Reopening.
Updated Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity.spec SRPM URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity-0.1.0-4.fc22.src.rpm
Please fix the permissions on the .so file (as shown in the output of 'rpmlint' below). Other than that, things look sane. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Permissions on files are set properly. Note: See rpmlint output See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: 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. [-]: 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 %license. [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". 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jsmith/Documents/Personal/Reviews/1091100-python- affinity/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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. [!]: 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]: 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]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [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 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]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags [?]: 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. [-]: 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]: 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: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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: python-affinity-0.1.0-4.fc22.x86_64.rpm python-affinity-0.1.0-4.fc22.src.rpm python-affinity.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) linux -> Linux python-affinity.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api -> API, pi, ape python-affinity.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US linux -> Linux python-affinity.x86_64: W: no-documentation python-affinity.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/affinity/_affinity.so 775 python-affinity.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) linux -> Linux python-affinity.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api -> API, pi, ape python-affinity.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US linux -> Linux 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: python-affinity-debuginfo-0.1.0-4.fc22.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- python-affinity.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) linux -> Linux python-affinity.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api -> API, pi, ape python-affinity.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US linux -> Linux python-affinity.x86_64: W: no-documentation python-affinity.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/affinity/_affinity.so 775 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. Requires -------- python-affinity (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libpython2.7.so.1.0()(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- python-affinity: python-affinity python-affinity(x86-64) python2-ffinity Unversioned so-files -------------------- python-affinity: /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/affinity/_affinity.so Source checksums ---------------- http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/a/affinity/affinity-0.1.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 667141a5ab5f48e096d169bfa58c1ac7fd293ac70c9199e02ef0dbfdf53cd2c4 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 667141a5ab5f48e096d169bfa58c1ac7fd293ac70c9199e02ef0dbfdf53cd2c4 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1091100 Buildroot used: fedora-22-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, SugarActivity, fonts, Haskell, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
Updated Spec URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity.spec SRPM URL: http://nb.fedorapeople.org/python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc22.src.rpm
Package is approved.
Thanks Jared! New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-affinity Short Description: provides a simple API for setting the processor affinity by wrapping the specific underlying function calls of each platform Upstream URL: https://pypi.python.org/pypi/affinity Owners: nb Branches: el6 el7 f21 f22 f23 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-affinity-0.1.0-5.el7
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc22
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc23 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 23. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc23
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc21
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-affinity-0.1.0-5.el6
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository.
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-affinity-0.1.0-5.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.