Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl-0.3.1-1.fc20.src.rpm Description: FCL is a library for performing three types of proximity queries on a pair of geometric models composed of triangles. * Collision detection: detecting whether the two models overlap, and optionally, all of the triangles that overlap. * Distance computation: computing the minimum distance between a pair of models, i.e., the distance between the closest pair of points. * Tolerance verification: determining whether two models are closer or farther than a tolerance distance. * Continuous collision detection: detecting whether the two moving models overlap during the movement, and optionally, the time of contact. * Contact information: for collision detection and continuous collision detection, the contact information (including contact normals and contact points) can be returned optionally. Fedora Account System Username: rmattes rpmlint: rpmlint ./fcl.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/fcl-* fcl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals fcl.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libfcl.so libfcl.so fcl.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libfcl.so exit.5 fcl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings. scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6916717
Update: Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl-0.3.2-1.fc21.src.rpm rpmlint: $ rpmlint ./fcl.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/fcl* fcl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals fcl.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libfcl.so libfcl.so fcl.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libfcl.so exit.5 fcl-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib fcl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
Some remarks: 1. IMO, this package is not properly licensed: # licensecheck -r . | grep UNKNOW ./src/math/sampling.cpp: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./src/continuous_collision.cpp: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./include/fcl/exception.h: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./include/fcl/math/vec_nf.h: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./include/fcl/math/sampling.h: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./include/fcl/ccd/simplex.h: UNKNOWN ./include/fcl/ccd/support.h: UNKNOWN ./include/fcl/continuous_collision.h: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./include/fcl/learning/classifier.h: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./test/libsvm_classifier.h: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./test/general_test.cpp: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./test/libsvm/svm.cpp: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./test/libsvm/svm.h: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./test/test_fcl_utility.cpp: *No copyright* UNKNOWN ./test/test_fcl_simple.cpp: *No copyright* UNKNOWN 2. fcl.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libfcl.so libfcl.so Please ask upstream to implement a proper SONAME, or add one yourself. 3. This construct in your spec will fail with consecutive short-circuit builds %build mkdir build; cd build A common work-around is to use mkdir -p build; cd build 4. This is an anacronism: %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT The "rm" is not needed anymore with recent rpms (IIRC, >= RHEL6) I for one consider 1. and 2. to be MUSTFIXes.
1. https://github.com/flexible-collision-library/fcl/issues/86 2. https://github.com/flexible-collision-library/fcl/pull/90 I've fixed 3 and 4 in my local spec file. I'll submit an updated package once I hear back from upstream on the two above issues.
I was going to submit a review request for fcl and then found out that you're working on it already :) There is a 0.5 release with the merged soname fix. There is a commit in master that fixes the licensing issue and that can be applied to 0.5. The 0.5 release has some issues with executable source files which rpmlint will complain about. You could fix these with find . -type f -perm /111 -name "*.h" -print -exec chmod -x '{}' \; find . -type f -perm /111 -name "*.cpp" -print -exec chmod -x '{}' \; (that's what I did in my spec file)
Thanks for the pointers Till. I've updated to 0.5.0, pulled the license information patch you referred to from upstream, and added the permission updates to the spec. Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl-0.5.0-1.fc24.src.rpm $ rpmlint ../SRPMS/fcl-0.5.0-1.fc24.src.rpm fcl.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [rich@primus SPECS]$ rpmlint ./fcl.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/fcl-* ../SRPMS/fcl-0.5.0-1.fc24.src.rpm fcl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals fcl.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libfcl.so.0.5.0 exit.5 fcl-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib fcl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation fcl.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15256434
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed === Issues === - LICENSE file is not packed Please, include the changelog file, too. - You don't need to indicate the commit; this is the release 0.5.0 https://github.com/flexible-collision-library/fcl/releases/tag/0.5.0 - Why is release number not the same? $ ll rpms-unpacked/fcl-0.5.0-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm/usr/lib64 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 sagitter sagitter 9443832 Oct 21 11:53 libfcl.so.0.5.0 lrwxrwxrwx. 1 sagitter sagitter 15 Oct 21 12:02 libfcl.so.7 -> libfcl.so.0.5.0 ===== 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. [!]: 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: "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 8 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1103555-fcl/licensecheck.txt [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/cmake(cmake, pulseaudio-libs-devel, qt5-qtlocation, phonon-devel, qt5-qtbase, gtk- doc, jsoncpp-devel) [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 1 files. [!]: 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]: 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]: 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 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]: 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 fcl- debuginfo [ ]: 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]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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: fcl-0.5.0-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm fcl-devel-0.5.0-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm fcl-debuginfo-0.5.0-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm fcl-0.5.0-1.fc26.src.rpm fcl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals fcl.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libfcl.so.0.5.0 exit.5 fcl-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib fcl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation fcl.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: fcl-debuginfo-0.5.0-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.21 starting (python version = 3.5.1)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata Mock Version: 1.2.21 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.21 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): rpmlint ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 26 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install rpmlint --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Requires -------- fcl-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): fcl-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config fcl(x86-64) libfcl.so.7()(64bit) fcl (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libccd.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) liboctomap.so.1.8()(64bit) liboctomath.so.1.8()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- fcl-debuginfo: fcl-debuginfo fcl-debuginfo(x86-64) fcl-devel: cmake(fcl) fcl-devel fcl-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(fcl) fcl: fcl fcl(x86-64) libfcl.so.7()(64bit) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/flexible-collision-library/fcl/archive/7075caf32ddcd5825ff67303902e3db7664a407a/fcl-7075caf32ddcd5825ff67303902e3db7664a407a.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3f7e5a26036b78ec404342305f9ab1a9187f66cb847c0bfe9adc18108dc46046 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3f7e5a26036b78ec404342305f9ab1a9187f66cb847c0bfe9adc18108dc46046 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1103555 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #6) > > - LICENSE file is not packed > Please, include the changelog file, too. Good catch, I have included the changelog and license. > - You don't need to indicate the commit; this is the > release 0.5.0 > https://github.com/flexible-collision-library/fcl/releases/tag/0.5.0 Changed the Source0 to use the tag, as per the guidelines at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Git_Tags > - Why is release number not the same? > > $ ll rpms-unpacked/fcl-0.5.0-1.fc26.x86_64.rpm/usr/lib64 > -rwxr-xr-x. 1 sagitter sagitter 9443832 Oct 21 11:53 libfcl.so.0.5.0 > lrwxrwxrwx. 1 sagitter sagitter 15 Oct 21 12:02 libfcl.so.7 -> > libfcl.so.0.5.0 > It looks like upstream is bumping the ABI version (used in the soname) each time they make an ABI breaking change, and somehow it got out of sync with the minor version. I don't think it's a big deal that they're out of sync; at least they're setting a soversion and incrementing it when needed. New packages: Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/fcl/fcl-0.5.0-2.fc24.src.rpm rpmlint: $ rpmlint ./fcl.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/fcl-* fcl.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US normals -> normal, normal's, formals fcl.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libfcl.so.0.5.0 exit.5 fcl-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib fcl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16151741
Package approved.
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/fcl
Thanks for the review Antonio!
fcl-0.5.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ab43254196
fcl-0.5.0-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-984856da7c
fcl-0.5.0-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-92b0fcd4e6
fcl-0.5.0-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
fcl-0.5.0-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
fcl-0.5.0-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.