Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/libnuml/libnuml.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/libnuml/libnuml-1.1.1-1.fc26.src.rpm Description: LibNuML is a library for reading/writing documents describing numerical results in an XML dialect. This release includes a number of improvements especially: * improved object structure matching the specification document * ability to add notes and annotations * improved python support. Fedora Account System Username: sagitter
Hello, - make %{?_smp_mflags} → %make_build - make -C build DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install → %make_install -C build - I'm not well versed in Java packaging so sorry if the following is not applicable: >Java programs that wish to make calls into native libraries do so via the Java Native Interface (JNI). A Java package uses JNI if it contains a .so file. Note that this file can be embedded within JAR files themselves. Your Java subpackage contains such .so file. > JAR files using JNI or containing JNI shared objects themselves MUST be placed in %{_jnidir} and MAY be symlinked to %{_libdir}/%{name}. JNI shared objects MUST be placed in %{_libdir}/%{name} Currently your .so file is in %{_libdir}, it seems that bccording to the guidelines it should be in %{_jnidir} with a symlink back to %{_libdir}/%{name} I'm not sure about this though, maybe someone with more Java experience than me could chimein.
Done! Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/libnuml/libnuml.spec SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/libnuml/libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc26.src.rpm - Created a documentation sub-package - Java shared library moved into a private lib directory - Java shared library symlinked from /usr/lib/java
Package accepted. 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]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [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: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* MPL (v2.0)". 32 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/libnuml/review-libnuml/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/cmake [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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. [x]: 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. [-]: 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 30720 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]: 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]: 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]: 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]: Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: libnuml-devel. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Java: [x]: Bundled jar/class files should be removed before build Maven: [-]: If package contains pom.xml files install it (including metadata) even when building with ant [x]: Old add_to_maven_depmap macro is not being used Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [-]: 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 python2-libnuml , python3-libnuml , java-NUML , libnuml-doc , libnuml- debuginfo , libnuml-debugsource [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: 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. Java: [x]: Packages are noarch unless they use JNI Note: libnuml subpackage is not noarch. Please verify manually [x]: Package uses upstream build method (ant/maven/etc.) ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libnuml-devel-1.1.1-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm python2-libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm python3-libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm java-NUML-1.1.1-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libnuml-doc-1.1.1-2.fc28.noarch.rpm libnuml-debuginfo-1.1.1-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libnuml-debugsource-1.1.1-2.fc28.x86_64.rpm libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc28.src.rpm libnuml-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation java-NUML.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libNUML -> Librium java-NUML.x86_64: W: no-documentation libnuml-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation 9 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
Thank you Robert.
(fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libnuml
libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-9f52a26653
libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-d78b010f25
libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-3af99694b7
libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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-2017-3af99694b7
libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2017-9f52a26653
libnuml-1.1.1-2.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 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-2017-d78b010f25
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-acc8203541
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-f49e8408f2
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-ed3377a3d0
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2017-ed3377a3d0
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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-2017-f49e8408f2
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 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-2017-acc8203541
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
libnuml-1.1.1-3.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.