Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/roidayan/rdcp/master/rdcp.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/roidayan/rdcp/fedora-21-x86_64/00143581-rdcp/rdcp-0.1-2.fc21.src.rpm Description: Remote Data Copy (RDMA file copy program) rdcp copies files between hosts on an rdma capable network. This utility can be used to copy large files between hosts and is substantially faster than using traditional copy utilities that use the TCP protocol, like rcp, scp, ftp. rdcp uses rdma cm to establish a connection between two capable hosts and uses rdma operations to copy a file to a listener host. rdcp is file based, thus it doesn't require from the user to setup a complicated environment (e.g. iser, cepth, lustre, etc) which requires pre-configuration of target and initiators. Fedora Account System Username: roidayan Hi, This is my first package request and I need a sponsor. I maintain rdcp in github (https://github.com/roidayan/rdcp) and would like to add a package for it. Thanks, Roi copr build: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/roidayan/rdcp/ koji build task: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12011251
Way too many issues in such a tiny package. :-( > %define debug_package %{nil} Why that if thousands of packages (compiled C) create proper -debuginfo packages? Why do you choose to apply this hammer? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Debuginfo_packages > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12011251 Please skim over the build.log file and perform a brief plausibility check? Why do you package a prebuilt executable instead of compiling it from source code? Also notice: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Compiler_flags > Packager: Slava Shwartsman <valyushash>, > Roi Dayan <roi.dayan> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags > Group: System Environment/Daemons 1.) It is no daemon. 2.) /usr/share/doc/rpm/GROUPS 3.) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Group_tag rdcp.c > * licenses. You may choose to be licensed under the terms of the GNU > * General Public License (GPL) Version 2, available from the file > * COPYING in the main directory of this source tree, or the > * OpenIB.org BSD license below: Yet no such COPYING file is included in your source tarball. The alternative licensing also means that the package is not "License: GPLv2". https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Dual_Licensing_Scenarios > Requires: libibverbs librdmacm https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires > ExcludeArch: s390 s390x https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Architecture_Support > %if %{defined suse_version} To be deleted. Multi-dist conditionals often don't work fully or introduce packaging mistakes too often. > Source0: %{name}-%{version}.tgz https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Referencing_Source > BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Group_tag > %install > %{__rm} -rf %{buildroot} https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag > %clean https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean > %defattr(-, root, root, -) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions > %doc README.md paper.txt https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
thanks for the detailed review. I'll go over it and update accordingly.
roidayan's scratch build of rdcp-0.1-2.fc21.src.rpm for f22 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12025235
Hi, I went over all your notes. I only got stuck with %license. I would like the spec to work with old fedora and with rhel which don't support this tag. is it ok to use something like mentioned here: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/411 %if 0%{?rhel} || 0%{?fedora} < 21 %doc LICENSE %else %license LICENSE %endif Thanks, Roi
or this, seems like a better option. %{!?_licensedir:%global license %doc} %license COPYING
roidayan's scratch build of rdcp-0.1-2.fc21.src.rpm for f24 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12025446
Hi, I fixed the spec file according to the review. the url to the spec is the same. latest srpm is available in the latest build in copr. https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/roidayan/rdcp/fedora-21-x86_64/00144204-rdcp/rdcp-0.1-2.fc21.src.rpm Thanks, Roi
If you want a review, you'll need to use the SRPM URL and Spec URL directives as per your initial request so that the fedora-review script can find them.
ok thanks. Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/roidayan/rdcp/master/rdcp.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/roidayan/rdcp/fedora-21-x86_64/00144204-rdcp/rdcp-0.1-2.fc21.src.rpm
pbrobinson's scratch build of copy-jdk-configs?#46c95d0c571fe75622843d99d92a24f392c9b621 for epel7-archbootstrap and git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/copy-jdk-configs?#46c95d0c571fe75622843d99d92a24f392c9b621 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12089468
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience.
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.