Spec URL: https://people.gnome.org/~mcrha/libical-glib/libical-glib.spec
SRPM URL: https://people.gnome.org/~mcrha/libical-glib/libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc23.src.rpm
Description: This package provides a GObject wrapper for libical library with support of GObject Introspection..
Fedora Account System Username: mcrha

I made an update on the .spec file and the .src.rpm, also utilizing recently released 1.0.2 version.

> Requires: pkgconfig(glib-2.0)
> Requires: pkgconfig(gobject-2.0)
> Requires: pkgconfig(gobject-introspection-1.0)
> Requires: pkgconfig(libxml-2.0)
> Requires: pkgconfig(libical) >= %{libical_version}

Two of those are redundant because they're in libical-glib.pc and thus RPM picks them up automatically.

The other three are suspicious precisely because they're *not* in libical-glib.pc

Rpmlint
-------
Checking: libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm
          libical-glib-devel-1.0.2-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm
          libical-glib-doc-1.0.2-1.fc21.noarch.rpm
          libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc21.src.rpm
libical-glib.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) GObject -> G Object, Object
libical-glib-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
libical-glib-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libical-glib.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) GObject -> G Object, Object
libical-glib.src:52: W: macro-in-comment %{with_docs}
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.


That all looks fine, but ISTR the guidelines say that rpmlint output MUST be shown in the review bug...

Items from the 'fedora-review' output which need manual checking and aren't *obviously* OK...

> ===== MUST items =====
> 
> [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
>      Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gtk-doc, /usr/share
>      /gtk-doc/html, /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0

Do we need to require the corresponding packages (or directories)?

> [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.

See comment 2,

> ===== SHOULD items =====
> 
> [ ]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
>      Note: %define requiring justification: %{!?with_docs: %define with_docs
>      1}, %define gtkdoc_flags --enable-gtk-doc, %define gtkdoc_flags
>      --disable-gtk-doc

With those addressed, I think I'm happy. I'll go ahead and set the fedora-review flag to + in anticipation...

(In reply to David Woodhouse from comment #2)
> > Requires: pkgconfig(glib-2.0)
> > Requires: pkgconfig(gobject-2.0)
> > Requires: pkgconfig(gobject-introspection-1.0)
> > Requires: pkgconfig(libxml-2.0)
> > Requires: pkgconfig(libical) >= %{libical_version}
> 
> Two of those are redundant because they're in libical-glib.pc and thus RPM
> picks them up automatically.
> 
> The other three are suspicious precisely because they're *not* in
> libical-glib.pc

Right, the gobject-introspection-1.0 and libxml-2.0 are required for build only, not for the runtime of the -devel subpackage. My fault.

(In reply to David Woodhouse from comment #4)
> > ===== MUST items =====
> > 
> > [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
> >      Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gtk-doc, /usr/share
> >      /gtk-doc/html, /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0
> 
> Do we need to require the corresponding packages (or directories)?

I do not know how to properly address them. The girepository is owned by gobject-introspection [1] and the gtk-doc folders, hmm, they do not seem to be owned by anything, nether the gtk-doc package [2]. I checked glib2 spec and they do not require gtk-doc for the -doc subpackage. I would also expect that the rpm will pick necessary packages on demand, how it does that for other dependencies.

[1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/gobject-introspection.git/tree/gobject-introspection.spec
[2] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/gtk-doc.git/tree/gtk-doc.spec

> > ===== SHOULD items =====
> > 
> > [ ]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
> >      Note: %define requiring justification: %{!?with_docs: %define with_docs
> >      1}, %define gtkdoc_flags --enable-gtk-doc, %define gtkdoc_flags
> >      --disable-gtk-doc

Fixed.

So the only opened issue is for the directory ownership for those not really owned by the libical-glib.

I've only now uploaded new .spec and .src.rpm  to the website, there were more occurrences of %define instead of %global.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: libical-glib
Short Description: GObject wrapper for libical library
Upstream URL: https://wiki.gnome.org/Projects/libical-glib
Owners: mcrha
Branches: f22
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

Thanks. There seems to fail something, I imported my spec file into the git, then sources, then tried to build it for the rawhide [1] and this is the failure output I've got:

>  9344173 buildArch (libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc23.src.rpm, armv7hl): open (arm04-builder11.arm.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
>  0 free  1 open  4 done  0 failed
> 9344126 build (rawhide, /libical-glib:c11ca5f9a29913e7e0904b7773a6755071cc5d80): open (arm04-builder21.arm.fedoraproject.org) -> FAILED: BuildError: mismatch when analyzing libical-glib-doc-1.0.2-1.fc23.noarch.rpm, rpmdiff output was:
> error: cannot open Packages index using db5 - Permission denied (13)
> error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm
> error: cannot open Packages database in /var/lib/rpm
> removed     REQUIRES libical-glib(armv7hl-32) = 1.0.2-1.fc23
> added       REQUIRES libical-glib(x86-64) = 1.0.2-1.fc23
>   0 free  0 open  4 done  1 failed

[1] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9344126

Ah, there was an issue with a doc subpackage dependency. I dropped it and it builds fine now.

libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc22

Package libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc22:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc22'
as soon as you are able to.
Please go to the following url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-5152/libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc22
then log in and leave karma (feedback).

libical-glib-1.0.2-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.