Bug 1469767 - Review Request: systemd-swap - Creating hybrid swap space from zram swaps, swap files and swap partitions
Review Request: systemd-swap - Creating hybrid swap space from zram swaps, sw...
Status: NEW
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity unspecified
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1341662
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2017-07-11 15:38 EDT by Raphael Groner
Modified: 2017-09-21 19:07 EDT (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Raphael Groner 2017-07-11 15:38:45 EDT
Spec URL: http://raphgro.fedorapeople.org//systemd-swap.spec
SRPM URL: http://raphgro.fedorapeople.org//systemd-swap-3.3.0-1.fc26.src.rpm

Description:
Manage swap on:
    zswap - Enable/Configure
    zram - Autoconfigurating
    files - (sparse files for saving space, support btrfs)
    block devices - auto find and do swapon
It is configurable in /etc/systemd/swap.conf
Comment 1 Raphael Groner 2017-07-11 15:38:50 EDT
This package built on koji:  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=20464780
Comment 2 Raphael Groner 2017-07-11 15:42:53 EDT
I am not lucky with the package name, though it's the name of the upstream project and I try to follow the addon guidelines. Although, the project is not part of systemd core and we don't have special guidelines for systemd addons.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Naming?rd=Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages
Comment 3 František Zatloukal 2017-08-08 06:04:58 EDT
Requires: kernel >= 2.6.37.1 # Remove kernel version check, it's not possible to install such an ancient kernel in Fedora. Also, you should depend on one of the kernel packages, not "kernel" itself.

Replace: 
> BuildRequires: systemd-units
> 
> Requires(post): systemd-sysv
> Requires(post): systemd-units
> Requires(preun): systemd-units
> Requires(postun): systemd-units
> 
> Requires: systemd

with

> %{?systemd_requires}
> BuildRequires: systemd

You have wrong service name: mkzram.service should be systemd-swap.service . (mkzram.service does not exist in this package).


Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
     Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/fanys/review/1469767-systemd-
     swap/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[ ]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[ ]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: 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 10240 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]: 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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:
[ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[ ]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[ ]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: 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]: 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 all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: systemd-swap-3.3.0-1.fc25.noarch.rpm
          systemd-swap-3.3.0-1.fc25.src.rpm
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) zram -> ram, tram, cram
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zswap -> swap, z swap
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zram -> ram, tram, cram
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US btrfs -> barfs
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US swapon -> swap on, swap-on, Swanson
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conf -> con, cone, cons
systemd-swap.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.0.0-1 ['3.3.0-1.fc25', '3.3.0-1']
systemd-swap.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary systemd-swap
systemd-swap.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) zram -> ram, tram, cram
systemd-swap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zswap -> swap, z swap
systemd-swap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zram -> ram, tram, cram
systemd-swap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US btrfs -> barfs
systemd-swap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US swapon -> swap on, swap-on, Swanson
systemd-swap.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conf -> con, cone, cons
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 14 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) zram -> ram, tram, cram
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zswap -> swap, z swap
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zram -> ram, tram, cram
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US btrfs -> barfs
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US swapon -> swap on, swap-on, Swanson
systemd-swap.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US conf -> con, cone, cons
systemd-swap.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.0.0-1 ['3.3.0-1.fc25', '3.3.0-1']
systemd-swap.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary systemd-swap
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
Comment 4 František Zatloukal 2017-08-21 12:20:35 EDT
Updated Review:


Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


===== MUST items =====

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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/fanys/review/1469767-systemd-
     swap/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: 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]: 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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:
[ ]: 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]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[-]: 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.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[?]: 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]: 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 all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Comment 5 Raphael Groner 2017-09-21 19:07:07 EDT
Thanks for your comments. Will update soonish, please be still patient.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.