Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00707709-racket/racket.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00707709-racket/racket-6.12-1.fc27.src.rpm Project Website: https://racket-lang.org/ Description: Racket is a general-purpose programming language as well as the world’s first ecosystem for developing and deploying new languages. Fedora Account System Username: dbenoit Most recent koji build URL: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24604603 Notes: This is my first package review submission. The package is unable to build on the following architectures: - armv7hl - s390x A section of code was discovered in one of the package's libraries which conflicts with Fedora's licensing policy. I have worked with upstream to address this, and it is safely removed with the following series of patches. # Update SRFI libraries to include upstream PR 5. # See: https://github.com/racket/srfi/pull/5 Patch0: racket-6.12-update-srfi.patch # Remove SRFI library and docs with restrictive licensing. # See: https://github.com/racket/srfi/issues/4 Patch1: racket-6.12-remove-nonfree.patch There is an existing review request open for Racket at the following link which was opened two years ago and has long since stagnated. I posted a while ago to see if I could help move it along, but I have not heard back from the anyone who participated in the original conversation. I think it is appropriate to close that review request and start fresh. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1301219
>Group: Development/Languages The "Group:" tag is not used in Fedora. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections >%package devel >Requires: racket This should be an arch-specific, versioned dependency. Otherwise racket-devel can be installed alongside any version of racket. Use "racket%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}". https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package >%package doc >Requires: racket Documentation packages should not depend on the main package. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation >%files >%{_libdir}/lib*-*.so >[...] >%files devel >%{_libdir}/*.so Won't this cause the *.so files to be included in both the main package and the -devel subpackage? Duplication should be avoided when possible. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplicate_Files
Thanks for the feedback! I have addressed those items, and here are the updated components: SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00708107-racket/racket-6.12-1.fc27.src.rpm SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00708107-racket/racket.spec Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24633595 %changelog * Thu Feb 1 2018 David Benoit <dbenoit> - 6.12 - Fix duplication of object files - Add version to racket-devel requirements - Remove base package as a dependency of racket-doc - Remove Groups tag
Here is the rpmlint output of the updated package: [dbenoit@dbenoit]$ rpmlint racket-6.12-1.fc27.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [dbenoit@dbenoit]$ rpmlint racket.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1301219 ***
*** Bug 1301219 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
It seems FE-DEADREVIEW was auto-blocked when the old bug was marked as a duplicate of this. I have removed the block since we are still actively working on this.
Latest build SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00730212-racket/racket-6.12-1.fc27.src.rpm SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00730212-racket/racket.spec Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25844207 rpmlint: [dbenoit@dbenoit]$ rpmlint racket.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [dbenoit@dbenoit]$ rpmlint racket-6.12-1.fc27.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Changelog: - fix text encoding issue in description section - remove doc-open-url scriptlets - add scriptlet to fix paths in html docs - add patch2 to backport rpaths fix in compiled .zo files - add patch3 to backport rpaths fix in web-server-lib - add patch4 to configure doc open url dynamically at runtime - remove override of __arch_install_post
No time for review but I think -doc should be noarch
SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00736626-racket/racket-6.12-1.fc27.src.rpm SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00736626-racket/racket.spec Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26153505 [dbenoit@dbenoit]$ rpmlint racket.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [dbenoit@dbenoit]$ rpmlint racket-6.12-1.fc27.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Additionally, it has come to my attention that the following source file is pre-generated by Racket. https://github.com/racket/racket/blob/master/racket/src/racket/src/startup.inc Racket distributes the sources used to generate this file as part of the main source distribution. Instructions on generating the file can be found here: https://github.com/racket/racket/blob/master/racket/src/expander/README.txt Please let me know whether this file meets the following packaging guideline, or whether it needs to be further addressed. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Use_of_pregenerated_code
Just to clarify, the concern with startup.inc is that it requires an existing copy of Racket to generate. It is a source file though, not a binary, so I'm not sure whether the package bootstrapping policy applies.
- This is not needed, as it is now done automatically: %post update-mime-database %{_datadir}/mime &> /dev/null || : update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : %postun update-mime-database %{_datadir}/mime &> /dev/null || : update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : - The libracket3m.so file should go to the devel package: "The versioned shared library files (/usr/lib/libfoo.so.3.2.0 and /usr/lib/libfoo.so.3) are necessary for users to run programs linked against libfoo, so they belong in the base package. The other, unversioned, shared library file (/usr/lib/libfoo.so) is only used to actually link libfoo to code being compiled, and is not necessary to be installed on a users system. This means that it belongs in a -devel package." https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages %files %{_bindir}/* %{_libdir}/racket %{_libdir}/libracket3m*.so %{_datadir}/racket %{_datadir}/applications/* %{_datadir}/man/* %{_sysconfdir}/racket/config.rktd %files devel %{_includedir}/* %{_libdir}/libracket3m.so The versioning of the library is also highly suspicious, it should be in the format libfoo.so.3.2.0, not libfoo-3.2.0.so. See with upstream the rationale for doing it this way instead of the typical one. - I don't think distributing startup.inc as is is an issue. - Since you install a .so in %{_libdir}, you need to run %ldconfig_scriptlets after %install - As per the guidelines: "each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs to have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture." See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Architecture_Build_Failures on how to file these bugs once approved. Also file bugs apstream reporting the failures, there's already once for Debian/s390x: https://github.com/racket/racket/issues/2018 - Remove: # Prevent empty debuginfo package. %global debug_package %{nil} Instead pass --disable-strip to %configure: %configure \ --enable-pthread \ --enable-shared \ --enable-libffi \ --disable-strip - You must include the license in %files with %license: %files %license COPYING.txt COPYING_LESSER.txt COPYING-libscheme.txt All those licenses must also be reflected in the License: field of the header. License: GPLv3 and LGPLv3 and MIT - You need to validate the .desktop files in %install with: desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/*.desktop See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage - You must own %{_sysconfdir}/racket [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/racket Add this to do so: %dir %{_sysconfdir}/racket %{_sysconfdir}/racket/config.rktd - You need to include the Release info in your %changelog entries and you must increment the Release: field as well for each release you make: Name: racket Version: 6.12 Release: 3%{?dist} And the corresponding %changelog entries: * Tue Mar 20 2018 David Benoit <dbenoit> 6.12-3 * Wed Jan 31 2018 David Benoit <dbenoit> - 6.12-1 * Thu Oct 26 2017 David Benoit <dbenoit> - 6.10-1 * Thu Jul 6 2017 David Benoit <dbenoit> - 6.9-1 * Fri Jan 22 2016 Brandon Thomas <bthomaszx> - 6.3-1 - You should be more specific in which man to include. Don't use: %{_datadir}/man/* instead use: %{_datadir}/man/man1/* Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages - 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. Note: License file COPYING-libscheme.txt is not marked as %license See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text - Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [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: "BSL LGPL", "Public domain", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "*No copyright* CC by", "LGPL (v3 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v3)", "MIT (old)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "*No copyright* bdwgc", "SIL (v1.1)", "*No copyright* LGPL", "BSD (3 clause)", "bdwgc", "LGPL (v2)", "LGPL", "Unknown or generated", "BSD (4 clause)", "NTP", "CC0", "LGPL (v2.1 or later)". 7859 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/racket/review- racket/licensecheck.txt [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /etc/racket [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/racket [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/man/man1(filesystem) [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. [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. [!]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [!]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [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]: 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [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]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [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). [?]: 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. [-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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: [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 262410240 bytes in /usr/share racket-6.12-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm:262410240 See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines#Package_Review_Guidelines [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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: racket-6.12-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm racket-debuginfo-6.12-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm racket-debugsource-6.12-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm racket-devel-6.12-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm racket-doc-6.12-1.fc29.noarch.rpm racket-6.12-1.fc29.src.rpm racket.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency glib2 racket.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libjpeg-turbo racket.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libpng racket.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 6.12 ['6.12-1.fc29', '6.12-1'] racket.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/racket/config.rktd racket.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/lib64/racket/starter-sh racket.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib64/racket/starter-sh racket.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/man/man1 racket.x86_64: W: pem-certificate /usr/share/racket/collects/openssl/test.pem racket.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/racket/pkgs/.LOCKpkgs.rktd racket.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/racket/pkgs/.LOCKpkgs.rktd racket.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/racket/pkgs/datalog/tests/examples/empty.txt racket.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/racket/pkgs/datalog/tests/paren-examples/empty.txt racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/htdp-lib/2htdp/uchat/xrun 644 /bin/sh racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/bitmatrix.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/catch.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/curses.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/fmod.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/hello.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/helloprint.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/idmodule.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/makeadder.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/makeadder3m.c racket.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/racket/pkgs/mzscheme-lib/mzscheme/examples/tree.cxx racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/io-conds.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/io-conds.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/records-core.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/records-core.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/records-explicit.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/records-explicit.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/lists-6.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/lists-6.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/records/inspection-6.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/records/inspection-6.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/records/procedural-6.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/records/procedural-6.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/records/syntactic-6.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/rnrs/records/syntactic-6.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-c-printf.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-c-printf.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-crypt.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-crypt.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-esd.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-esd.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-magick.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-magick.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-sndfile.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-sndfile.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-tcl.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-tcl.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-xmmsctrl.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-xmmsctrl.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-xosd.rkt /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/racket-doc/ffi/examples/use-xosd.rkt 644 /usr/bin/env racket racket.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/racket/pkgs/scribble-lib/scribble/jfp/jfp.css racket.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/racket/pkgs/scribble-lib/scribble/scribble-style.css racket.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/racket/pkgs/scribble-lib/scribble/scribble-style.tex racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/srfi-lib/srfi/%3a1.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/srfi-lib/srfi/%3a1.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/srfi-lib/srfi/%3a67.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/srfi-lib/srfi/%3a67.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/srfi-lib/srfi/%3a8.rkt r6rs racket.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/racket/pkgs/srfi-lib/srfi/%3a8.rkt 644 r6rs racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gracket-text racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mred-text racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mzpp racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mztext racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pdf-slatex racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary plt-games racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary plt-r5rs racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary plt-r6rs racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary plt-web-server racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary scribble racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary slatex racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary slideshow racket.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary swindle racket-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation racket-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib racket-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation racket-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/include/racket/ext.exp .. racket-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/include/racket/ext.exp 644 .. racket-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/include/racket/mzscheme.exp .. racket-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/include/racket/mzscheme.exp 644 .. racket-devel.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/include/racket/mzscheme3m.exp .. racket-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/include/racket/mzscheme3m.exp 644 .. racket-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/racket/doc-site.css racket-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/racket/doc-site.js racket-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/racket/local-redirect/local-user-redirect.js racket-doc.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/racket/scribble-style.css 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 59 errors, 30 warnings.
SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00740429-racket/racket.spec SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00740429-racket/racket-6.12-5.fc27.src.rpm Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26310121
- Don't use %license %{_datadir}/racket/COPYING* use: %license COPYING.txt COPYING_LESSER.txt COPYING-libscheme.txt - You must install the %license in every package combination possible, so also in %files minimal and %files doc
SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00742662-racket/racket.spec SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00742662-racket/racket-6.12-6.fc27.src.rpm Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=26440249
Seems good, package is ok to be approved once you find a sponsor.
> Summary: A general-purpose programming language Please remove "A ". > # Issue Building for s390x and armv7hl in koji Adding link would be useful. > %{_includedir}/* Don't use such wildcards, please. > %global _hardened_build 1 No need, it's default. * Missing BuildRequires for gcc (or/and gcc-c++ if used). -- I will look closely into package tomorrow and will sponsor you.
Finally got time to look into this properly.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/racket/collects, /usr/share/racket, /usr/share/racket/pkgs > Requires: gtk3 cairo pango libpng glib2 libjpeg-turbo Can you put them on separate lines describing why they are needed and also use %{?_isa}? Or if it uses dlopen(), then use libfoo.so.X and such. > racket.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/bin/mred-text racket Please fix this. > racket-minimal.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/racket/config.rktd Use %config. > racket-minimal.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/lib64/racket/starter-sh > racket-minimal.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/lib64/racket/starter-sh Some comment on this? > racket-collects.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/share/racket/collects/openssl/test.pem > racket-pkgs.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/share/racket/collects/openssl/test.pem Do you want to distribute some test.pem, really? > racket-pkgs.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/io-conds.rkt r6rs And such... Can you fix that? > racket-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on racket/racket-libs/libracket Need to fix this.
Gathering info to address these issues. Thanks!
SPEC: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00787498-racket/racket.spec SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dbenoit/racket/fedora-27-x86_64/00787498-racket/racket-6.12-8.fc27.src.rpm Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29047678 > > Requires: gtk3 cairo pango libpng glib2 libjpeg-turbo These dependencies are only used by the noarch racket-pkgs subpackage. I have moved the Requires to the subpackage directly, which I think means the dependencies now should not be arched. > > racket-collects.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/share/racket/collects/openssl/test.pem > > racket-pkgs.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/share/racket/collects/openssl/test.pem Racket's standard libraries generally bundle unit tests as part of the distribution. The test.pem file is used only within the unit tests. I have checked with upstream, and if the test.pem is not appropriate in Fedora we could remove the openssl unit tests from the rpm. > > racket-pkgs.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/racket/pkgs/r6rs-lib/r6rs/private/io-conds.rkt r6rs This is a result of the r6rs Scheme language standard. Top-level program files written in the r6rs version of Scheme contain the #!r6rs header as part of the the file structure. > > racket-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on racket/racket-libs/libracket racket-devel does not require the entire package or to be installed. It only requires racket-minimal.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/racket
This seems to have been built for Fedora 28. David, please remember to tag your package updates with the relevant bug reports so that they are closed.