Bug 1482055 - Review Request: shairport-sync - AirTunes emulator. Shairport Sync adds multi-room capability with Audio Synchronisation.
Summary: Review Request: shairport-sync - AirTunes emulator. Shairport Sync adds multi...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin 🐧
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2017-08-16 11:37 UTC by Bill Peck
Modified: 2017-08-18 14:04 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-08-18 14:04:20 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
eclipseo: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Bill Peck 2017-08-16 11:37:36 UTC
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/mikebrady/shairport-sync/master/shairport-sync.spec
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/bpeck/shairport-sync/fedora-26-x86_64/00590750-shairport-sync/shairport-sync-3.0-1.git.0.2069d82None.src.rpm
Description: Shairport Sync emulates an AirPort Express for the purpose of streaming audio from iTunes, iPods, iPhones, iPads and AppleTVs. Audio played by a Shairport Sync-powered device stays synchronised with the source and hence with similar devices playing the same source. Thus, for example, synchronised multi-room audio is possible without difficulty. (Hence the name Shairport Sync, BTW.)
Fedora Account System Username: bpeck

Comment 1 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 12:47:31 UTC
Hello,


There are several issues with your package:

 - First the licence is wrong, I can't find GPL anywhere, instead upstream list a mix of MIT and BSD (for tinysvcmdns.c). See https://github.com/mikebrady/shairport-sync/blob/master/LICENSES . It should be reflected and detailed in the SPEC (i.e. which parts are MIT, which parts are BSD).

 - LICENSES should be listed in %files under %license, not %doc

 - %doc AUTHORS LICENSES README.md → AUTHORS is empty, don't include it.

 - %doc should also include RELEASENOTES.md and TROUBLESHOOTING.md

 - the %changelog is wrong: the version should be in the format %version-%release
   For example: 3.0-1
   Also your package says you are packaging 3.0, but your changelog stops at 2.8.6. And you haven't added your own name either.

 - You should package the latest stable version, which is 3.1 according to https://github.com/mikebrady/shairport-sync/releases

 - you shoud use pkgconfig for your libraries:
pkgconfig(libconfig)
pkgconfig(popt)
pkgconfig(openssl)
pkgconfig(libdaemon)
pkgconfig(avahi-core)
pkgconfig(alsa)
pkgconfig(soxr)

 - The Group: tag is not needed in Fedora, please remove it. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections

 - Source0 should be changed to:
Source0:        https://github.com/mikebrady/%{name}/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

 - make %{?_smp_mflags} should be replace with %make_build

 - make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot} should be replaced with %make_install

 - You're installing a systemd service file. There are special requirements for those. First you must have a BR on systemd with the following macro:

%{?systemd_requires}
BuildRequires:  systemd

 Second you must add scriplets in %post, %preun, %postun. 
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets?rd=Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd

%post
%systemd_post %{name}.service

%preun
%systemd_preun %{name}.service

%postun
%systemd_postun_with_restart %{name}.service


Btw, systemd-units should not be a BR.

 - You shouldn't Requires lib dependencies, dnf will automatically detects them.
so no need for alsa-lib, libdaemon, libpopt-dev, openssl, avahi and soxr

 - Your description lines are too long, you should split them before 80 characters

 - Release should have a dist tag:
Release:        1%{?dist}

 - You shouldn't+++ mix both $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot}. Choose one and stick with it.

Comment 2 Bill Peck 2017-08-17 15:38:29 UTC
Thank you for the thorough review.  I believe I've addressed all your concerns here:

https://github.com/p3ck/shairport-sync/blob/development/shairport-sync.spec

Comment 3 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 15:55:29 UTC
One last thing: your %config should be %config(noreplace)

Comment 4 Bill Peck 2017-08-17 15:58:06 UTC
Good catch!  Thank you.

above url should show the update.

Comment 5 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 16:03:23 UTC
I've just noticed that you didn't fix this:

the %changelog version is wrong: the version should be in the format %version-%release
   For example: 3.1-1

You need to add -1 to your changelog entry.

Comment 6 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 16:35:44 UTC
Sorry there's still some issue regarding licensing that I didn't catch before:

GPL (v3 or later)
-----------------
shairport-sync-3.1/FFTConvolver/FFTConvolver.cpp
shairport-sync-3.1/FFTConvolver/FFTConvolver.h
shairport-sync-3.1/FFTConvolver/Utilities.cpp
shairport-sync-3.1/FFTConvolver/Utilities.h

ISC
---
shairport-sync-3.1/audio_sndio.c


You need to add: and GPLv3+ and ISC

Comment 7 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 16:55:18 UTC
You've got a rpmlint error because your summary line is too long and ends with a dot. Shorten it and remove the dot.
Also you should detail the breakdown of license in the SPEC, not make a reference to the LICENSES


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

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



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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "ISC", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or
     generated", "BSD (3 clause)". 42 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/shairport-sync
     /review-shairport-sync/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: 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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: 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 133120 bytes in 3 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     shairport-sync-debuginfo
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
[x]: 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 debuginfo package(s).
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: shairport-sync-3.1-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm
          shairport-sync-debuginfo-3.1-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm
          shairport-sync-3.1-1.fc27.src.rpm
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) multi -> mulch, mufti
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot C AirTunes emulator. Shairport Sync adds multi-room capability with Audio Synchronisation.
shairport-sync.x86_64: E: summary-too-long C AirTunes emulator. Shairport Sync adds multi-room capability with Audio Synchronisation.
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPods -> i Pods, iPod, iPod's
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPhones -> i Phones, iPhone, iPhone's
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPads -> i Pads, iPad, iPad's
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US synchronised -> synchronized, synchronize, synchronicity
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.1 ['3.1-1.fc27', '3.1-1']
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) multi -> mulch, mufti
shairport-sync.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot C AirTunes emulator. Shairport Sync adds multi-room capability with Audio Synchronisation.
shairport-sync.src: E: summary-too-long C AirTunes emulator. Shairport Sync adds multi-room capability with Audio Synchronisation.
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPods -> i Pods, iPod, iPod's
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPhones -> i Phones, iPhone, iPhone's
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPads -> i Pads, iPad, iPad's
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US synchronised -> synchronized, synchronize, synchronicity
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 17 warnings.

Comment 8 Bill Peck 2017-08-17 17:13:18 UTC
Can you give me an example on how to reference the licenses inside the spec?

I went by this example:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios

# For a breakdown of the licensing, see PACKAGE-LICENSING

Comment 9 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 17:25:42 UTC
LICENSESdoesn't contain all the breakdown.

Go with something like

# MIT licensed except for tinysvcmdns under BSD, 
# FFTConvolver/ under GPLv3+ and audio_sndio.c 
# under ISC

Comment 10 Bill Peck 2017-08-17 17:28:41 UTC
Thank you very much.

I believe I've made all of the requested changes.

Comment 11 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 18:05:28 UTC
You must separate license by "and":
License:        MIT and BSD and GPLv3+ and ISC

Comment 12 Bill Peck 2017-08-17 18:06:55 UTC
I was trying to be too clever.

Updated

Comment 13 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 18:12:13 UTC
Here we are, all good. Package accepted.

Thanks for your work.



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

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


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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "ISC", "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or
     generated", "BSD (3 clause)". 42 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/shairport-sync
     /review-shairport-sync/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: 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 133120 bytes in 3 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     shairport-sync-debuginfo
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
[x]: 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 debuginfo package(s).
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: shairport-sync-3.1-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm
          shairport-sync-debuginfo-3.1-1.fc27.x86_64.rpm
          shairport-sync-3.1-1.fc27.src.rpm
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Multi -> Mulch, Mufti
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPods -> i Pods, iPod, iPod's
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPhones -> i Phones, iPhone, iPhone's
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPads -> i Pads, iPad, iPad's
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US synchronised -> synchronized, synchronize, synchronicity
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id
shairport-sync.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/.build-id
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Multi -> Mulch, Mufti
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPods -> i Pods, iPod, iPod's
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPhones -> i Phones, iPhone, iPhone's
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iPads -> i Pads, iPad, iPad's
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US synchronised -> synchronized, synchronize, synchronicity
shairport-sync.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multi -> mulch, mufti
shairport-sync.src: W: invalid-license MIT, BSD, GPLv3+
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 15 warnings.

Comment 14 Bill Peck 2017-08-17 18:22:32 UTC
What is the next step I should be doing here?

I tried the following:

[bpeck@bpeck ~]$ fedrepo-req shairport-sync -t 1482055
Error: The Bugzilla ticket provided is invalid

Thanks

Comment 15 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 18:41:31 UTC
I have no idea why you're getting this message. Try asking on fedora-devel or do a bug request on https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issues

Comment 16 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2017-08-17 19:04:19 UTC
It seems to be working, I see your newrepo request here: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/80

Comment 17 Bill Peck 2017-08-17 19:05:15 UTC
Yes.

In case anyone else is stuck I had to delete .bugzillacookie and .bugzillatoken from my home dir.

Comment 18 Gwyn Ciesla 2017-08-17 21:17:26 UTC
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/shairport-sync


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