Hide Forgot
Spec URL: https://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/python-docker-squash.spec SRPM URL: https://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/python-docker-squash-1.0.0-0.3.rc3.fc23.src.rpm Description: Tool to squash layers in Docker images Fedora Account System Username: goldmann Koji task: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13529516 This is a re-review after name change from python-docker-scripts.
Original review in #1221204. +Provides: python-docker-scripts = %{version}-%{release} +Obsoletes: python-docker-scripts <= 1.0.0-0.2.rc2 Looks correct. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Git_Hosting_Services for a nicer way to specify Source URL that gives an archive with a better name. Why do you provide both /usr/bin/docker-squash3 and /usr/bin/docker-squash? Do they provide different functionality? If not, only one should be provided. If both implementations are equivalent, implementation in python3 is preferred [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Executables_in_.2Fusr.2Fbin].
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #1) > See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Git_Hosting_Services > for a nicer way to specify Source URL that gives an archive with a better > name. That's cool, although I'll stay with what I have currently :) > Why do you provide both /usr/bin/docker-squash3 and /usr/bin/docker-squash? > Do they provide different functionality? If not, only one should be > provided. If both implementations are equivalent, implementation in python3 > is preferred > [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Executables_in_.2Fusr. > 2Fbin]. Nope, the functionality is the same. For sure I want to maintain the same spec file across all Fedora's and EPEL 7, so I'll see what can I do.
> Nope, the functionality is the same. For sure I want to maintain the same spec file across all Fedora's and EPEL 7, so I'll see what can I do. You should provide /usr/bin/docker-squash which uses /usr/bin/python3 or /usr/bin/python2 conditionally on the Fedora/EPEL version.
I was looking at the python-pygments spec file to get an idea how to fix it since its mentioned as an example on the wiki, but I still don't get it. Especially this line: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python-pygments.git/tree/python-pygments.spec?id=41198a3579e621f6885165e5d19fb76a20937a19#n190 which packages the pygmentize binary in python-pygmentize package (which is still 2 by default). Additionally python3 version is installed before python2: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python-pygments.git/tree/python-pygments.spec?id=41198a3579e621f6885165e5d19fb76a20937a19#n138 (which makes comment on line 136 and 137 true). So it's effectively python2 version of pygmentize packaged. Am I missing something obvious here? I think I could get use some help on adopting the change since this is a bit unclear what should I do.
Created attachment 1146671 [details] updated spec file Please see the attached spec file. It simplifies stuff quite a bit by using the macros from https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file. I also looked at the effect of 2to3 translation, and it's just one change (iteritems() → items()). It's much nicer to use a single source without 2to3 translation, and py3dir, so I replaced that with a sed invocation. I think you should file that as a patch upstream. The spec file required one more major change: python2 subpackage must be added according to the new guidelines [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python].
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #5) > Please see the attached spec file. It simplifies stuff quite a bit by using > the macros from > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Example_common_spec_file. That indeed looks nicer, thanks for helping me out! I've build it on all targets and it seems to work, cool. > I also looked at the effect of 2to3 translation, and it's just one change > (iteritems() → items()). It's much nicer to use a single source without 2to3 > translation, and py3dir, so I replaced that with a sed invocation. I think > you should file that as a patch upstream. This basically should be untouched. This is monkey patch for Python 2 only to enable UTF8 names in PAX headers in tar archives. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1194473 > The spec file required one more major change: python2 subpackage must be > added according to the new guidelines > [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python]. Awesome, thanks for doing it! I additionally upgraded to RC4 and here are new files: Spec URL: https://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/python-docker-squash.spec SRPM URL: https://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/python-docker-squash-1.0.0-0.5.rc4.fc23.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13643225
Thanks for the explanation about xtarfile. Everything looks OK: + latest version + name is OK + license is acceptable + license file is present, %license is used + build and installs OK + provides/requires look sane + obsoletes/provides for the previous version are OK rpmlint: python3-docker-squash.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary docker-squash 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Package is (RE-)APPROVED.
Thank you!
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-docker-squash