Spec URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/util/diodon.spec SRPM URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/util/diodon-1.4.0-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: Clipboard manager for GNOME and Cinnamon Fedora Account System Username: raphgro Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13476153
Fixed missing BR: desktop-file-utils Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13476181
And second, fixed build on x86. No idea why arm FTBFS. Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13476279
Third, fixed arm FTBFS.
Why BuildRequires: waf when you are using the source provide waf file ./waf install --destdir=%{buildroot} and please use the %{_mandir} in the files section rpm -E %{_mandir} /usr/share/man
(In reply to leigh scott from comment #4) > Why BuildRequires: waf when you are using the source provide waf file > > ./waf install --destdir=%{buildroot} Should I unbundle waf and use the external scripts provided in Fedora? > and please use the %{_mandir} in the files section Sure. Forgot that. Thanks for your advice.
Spec URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/util/diodon.spec SRPM URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/util/diodon-1.4.0-2.fc23.src.rpm Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13485587 %changelog * Mon Mar 28 2016 Raphael Groner <projects.rg> - 1.4.0-2 - move vala files into devel subpackage - skip tests execution with waf, run them directly to get details in output - unbundle waf, not working yet - use mandir macro - fix lib64 - make devel subpackage arched, noarch lets arm FTBFS - add BR: desktop-file-utils, for koji - improve comment for license breakdown - rearrange sections
1. Regarding bundled waf - I would like to see bug for upstream for updating their bundled version of waf (then we can just remove waf, waflib from source tree) 2. I would like to see dependencies in pkgconfig() format. It's more easy to maintain. BuildRequires: pkgconfig(gdk-3.0) 3. Requires: libgee-devel I think you missed %{?_isa} 4. BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils. The same as in point 2. BuildRequires: /usr/bin/desktop-file-validate 5. Header and symlink for soname library etc. Development files and headers required ... It should be more descriptive 6. I'm not sure if we should include "diodon-test" in package. What is it for? [brain@x1carbon bin]$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../lib64/ ./diodon-test /TestImageClipboardItem/test_image_clipboard_item_new_with_payload: ** Message: testcase.vala:140: Got exception while excuting test: Failed to open file '/builddir/build/BUILD/diodon-1.4.0/tests/data/Diodon-64x64.png': No such file or directory FAIL Aborted (core dumped) yes, remove it. 7. %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0/*.typelib typelib should go to main package, not -devel. Because it is used in runtime by other GObject-based applications. Once this will be fixed - I will approve ;)
(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #7) > 1. Regarding bundled waf - I would like to see bug for upstream for updating > their bundled version of waf (then we can just remove waf, waflib from > source tree) Good point. I'll do so. > 2. I would like to see dependencies in pkgconfig() format. It's more easy to > maintain. > BuildRequires: pkgconfig(gdk-3.0) pkgconfig is not available for libgee, so I decided to skip. $ LC_ALL=C dnf whatprovides 'pkgconfig(libgee)' Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:11 ago on Tue Mar 29 11:44:01 2016. Error: No Matches found > 3. Requires: libgee-devel > I think you missed %{?_isa} What do you mean? > 4. BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils. The same as in point 2. > BuildRequires: /usr/bin/desktop-file-validate Not true. It's to prefer to give direct package name. > 5. Header and symlink for soname library etc. > Development files and headers required ... > It should be more descriptive Please give a suggestion how to improve. > 6. I'm not sure if we should include "diodon-test" in package. What is it > for? > [brain@x1carbon bin]$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../lib64/ ./diodon-test > /TestImageClipboardItem/test_image_clipboard_item_new_with_payload: ** > Message: testcase.vala:140: Got exception while excuting test: Failed to > open file '/builddir/build/BUILD/diodon-1.4.0/tests/data/Diodon-64x64.png': > No such file or directory > FAIL > Aborted (core dumped) > > yes, remove it. Okay. It's installed from wscript, so I did not touch. > 7. %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0/*.typelib > typelib should go to main package, not -devel. Because it is used in runtime > by other GObject-based applications. Okay. I wasn't sure how to handle. > Once this will be fixed - I will approve ;) Thanks.
(In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #8) > (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #7) > > 1. Regarding bundled waf - I would like to see bug for upstream for updating > > their bundled version of waf (then we can just remove waf, waflib from > > source tree) > > Good point. I'll do so. > > > 2. I would like to see dependencies in pkgconfig() format. It's more easy to > > maintain. > > BuildRequires: pkgconfig(gdk-3.0) > > pkgconfig is not available for libgee, so I decided to skip. [brain@x1carbon bin]$ sudo dnf repoquery --provides libgee-devel Last metadata expiration check: 1:15:36 ago on Tue Mar 29 10:53:47 2016. libgee-devel = 0.18.0-3.fc24 libgee-devel(x86-32) = 0.18.0-3.fc24 libgee-devel(x86-64) = 0.18.0-3.fc24 pkgconfig(gee-0.8) = 0.18.0 > > $ LC_ALL=C dnf whatprovides 'pkgconfig(libgee)' > Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:11 ago on Tue Mar 29 11:44:01 2016. > Error: No Matches found > > > 3. Requires: libgee-devel > > I think you missed %{?_isa} > > What do you mean? Requires: libgree-devel%{?_isa} > > > 4. BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils. The same as in point 2. > > BuildRequires: /usr/bin/desktop-file-validate > > Not true. It's to prefer to give direct package name. > > > 5. Header and symlink for soname library etc. > > Development files and headers required ... > > It should be more descriptive > > Please give a suggestion how to improve. > > > 6. I'm not sure if we should include "diodon-test" in package. What is it > > for? > > [brain@x1carbon bin]$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=../lib64/ ./diodon-test > > /TestImageClipboardItem/test_image_clipboard_item_new_with_payload: ** > > Message: testcase.vala:140: Got exception while excuting test: Failed to > > open file '/builddir/build/BUILD/diodon-1.4.0/tests/data/Diodon-64x64.png': > > No such file or directory > > FAIL > > Aborted (core dumped) > > > > yes, remove it. > > Okay. It's installed from wscript, so I did not touch. > > > 7. %{_libdir}/girepository-1.0/*.typelib > > typelib should go to main package, not -devel. Because it is used in runtime > > by other GObject-based applications. > > Okay. I wasn't sure how to handle. > > > Once this will be fixed - I will approve ;) > > Thanks.
We need a package for valadoc to get doc/wscript_build working.
Spec URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/util/diodon.spec SRPM URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/util/diodon-1.4.0-3.fc23.src.rpm Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13498576 %changelog * Tue Mar 29 2016 Raphael Groner <projects.rg> - 1.4.0-3 - improve unbundling of waf towards python3, not yet functional - use BR: pkgconfing() - enforce version of vala api - use Requires with _isa flag - improve summary and description - remove tests binary from package - move girepository into main package - disable generation of documentation, valadoc is not available
Successfully upstreamed the patch for desktop file validation. https://bugs.launchpad.net/diodon/+bug/1562563
http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~diodon-team/diodon/trunk/revision/512
Igor, please continue with the review. As far as I can see, I've fixed all of your points.
I will continue.
Scratch build for f24: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14886183 $ rpmlint -i -v * diodon.armv7hl: I: checking diodon.armv7hl: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon.i686: I: checking diodon.i686: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon.src: I: checking diodon.src: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon.src:97: W: macro-in-comment %{_bindir} There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate. diodon.src:97: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir} There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate. diodon.src:104: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib, /usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}. diodon.src: I: checking-url https://launchpad.net/diodon/trunk/1.4.0/+download/diodon-1.4.0.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) diodon.x86_64: I: checking diodon.x86_64: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon-debuginfo.armv7hl: I: checking diodon-debuginfo.armv7hl: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon-debuginfo.armv7hl: E: debuginfo-without-sources This debuginfo package appears to contain debug symbols but no source files. This is often a sign of binaries being unexpectedly stripped too early during the build, or being compiled without compiler debug flags (which again often is a sign of distro's default compiler flags ignored which might have security consequences), or other compiler flags which result in rpmbuild's debuginfo extraction not working as expected. Verify that the binaries are not unexpectedly stripped and that the intended compiler flags are used. diodon-debuginfo.i686: I: checking diodon-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon-debuginfo.i686: E: debuginfo-without-sources This debuginfo package appears to contain debug symbols but no source files. This is often a sign of binaries being unexpectedly stripped too early during the build, or being compiled without compiler debug flags (which again often is a sign of distro's default compiler flags ignored which might have security consequences), or other compiler flags which result in rpmbuild's debuginfo extraction not working as expected. Verify that the binaries are not unexpectedly stripped and that the intended compiler flags are used. diodon-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking diodon-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources This debuginfo package appears to contain debug symbols but no source files. This is often a sign of binaries being unexpectedly stripped too early during the build, or being compiled without compiler debug flags (which again often is a sign of distro's default compiler flags ignored which might have security consequences), or other compiler flags which result in rpmbuild's debuginfo extraction not working as expected. Verify that the binaries are not unexpectedly stripped and that the intended compiler flags are used. diodon-devel.armv7hl: I: checking diodon-devel.armv7hl: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon-devel.armv7hl: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. diodon-devel.i686: I: checking diodon-devel.i686: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon-devel.i686: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. diodon-devel.x86_64: I: checking diodon-devel.x86_64: I: checking-url https://esite.ch/tag/diodon (timeout 10 seconds) diodon-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib There are only non binary files in /usr/lib so they should be in /usr/share. diodon-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. diodon.spec: I: checking diodon.spec:97: W: macro-in-comment %{_bindir} There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate. diodon.spec:97: W: macro-in-comment %{_libdir} There is a unescaped macro after a shell style comment in the specfile. Macros are expanded everywhere, so check if it can cause a problem in this case and escape the macro with another leading % if appropriate. diodon.spec:104: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib A library path is hardcoded to one of the following paths: /lib, /usr/lib. It should be replaced by something like /%{_lib} or %{_libdir}. diodon.spec: I: checking-url https://launchpad.net/diodon/trunk/1.4.0/+download/diodon-1.4.0.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) 10 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 8 warnings. Only the warning about an unescaped macro needs attention, see below. --------------------------------- key: [+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work --------------------------------- [+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. GPLv2+ and BSD [.] MUST: 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 must be included in %license. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. $ sha256sum * 02e480dfce8d61a0bb735517cf0171d1e10d647f30b656928b068070efb4f8c3 diodon-1.4.0.tar.gz 02e480dfce8d61a0bb735517cf0171d1e10d647f30b656928b068070efb4f8c3 diodon-1.4.0.tar.gz.orig [+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. [+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. [+] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [.] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations) [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [+] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [+] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [.] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See Koji build above (which uses Mock anyway). [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. [+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [+] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [.] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. ---------------- PACKAGE APPROVED ---------------- "Requires: hicolor-icon-theme" is not needed, this is already pulled in by gtk3. Also gettext, which is a requirement of intltool. Well, it's your decision to keep them or drop them. Please escape the macros in comments before importing your package into Git to avoid eventually unexpected behavior.
BTW, latest release is 1.5: https://esite.ch/2016/04/small-bug-fix-release-diodon-1-5-0/
Thanks for the review!
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/diodon
> diodon-debuginfo.armv7hl: E: debuginfo-without-sources https://bugs.launchpad.net/diodon/+bug/634375 > diodon.spec:104: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib Another issue with waf, we need to use '--libdir=%{_libdir}'.
diodon-1.5.0-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-4ba44c90c3
diodon-1.5.0-1.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-3fe21473bd
diodon-1.5.0-1.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-2016-4ba44c90c3
diodon-1.5.0-1.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-2016-3fe21473bd
diodon-1.5.0-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
diodon-1.5.0-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.