Bug 1635930 - Review Request: libgpuarray - Library to manipulate tensors on a GPU
Summary: Review Request: libgpuarray - Library to manipulate tensors on a GPU
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: 2018-10-04 01:31 UTC by Jerry James
Modified: 2018-10-07 00:51 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-10-07 00:51:40 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
zebob.m: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jerry James 2018-10-04 01:31:31 UTC
Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/libgpuarray/libgpuarray.spec
SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/libgpuarray/libgpuarray-0.7.6-1.fc30.src.rpm
Description: The goal of this project is to make a common GPU ndarray (n dimensional array) that can be reused by all projects, that is as future proof as possible, while keeping it easy to use for simple needs and quick tests.
Fedora Account System Username: jjames

Comment 1 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-10-04 14:07:09 UTC
 - Python 2 is deprecated(), you're not supposed to package new stuff with it.

Package approved, just drop Py 2.


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

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


Issues:
=======
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
  Note: python2-libs is deprecated, you must not depend on it.
  See:  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Deprecating_Packages


===== 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]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised"
     License", "ISC License", "*No copyright* Public domain", "Expat
     License", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License". 201 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/bob/packaging/review/libgpuarray/review-
     libgpuarray/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: 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.
[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 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
     Note: Package contains font files
[-]: 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
     libgpuarray-doc , python2-pygpu-devel , python3-pygpu-devel ,
     libgpuarray-debuginfo , libgpuarray-debugsource
[?]: 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: 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: libgpuarray-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          libgpuarray-devel-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          libgpuarray-doc-0.7.6-1.fc30.noarch.rpm
          python2-pygpu-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          python2-pygpu-devel-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          python3-pygpu-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          python3-pygpu-devel-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          libgpuarray-debuginfo-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          libgpuarray-debugsource-0.7.6-1.fc30.x86_64.rpm
          libgpuarray-0.7.6-1.fc30.src.rpm
libgpuarray.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ndarray -> array
libgpuarray-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
python2-pygpu.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ndarray -> array
python2-pygpu.x86_64: W: no-documentation
python2-pygpu-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
python3-pygpu.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ndarray -> array
python3-pygpu.x86_64: W: no-documentation
python3-pygpu-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
libgpuarray.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ndarray -> array
10 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.

Comment 2 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-10-04 14:36:34 UTC
I forgot this:


[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.


Please detail what licenses cover which parts in a comment.

Comment 3 Jerry James 2018-10-05 02:47:57 UTC
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #1)
>  - Python 2 is deprecated(), you're not supposed to package new stuff with
> it.

(* Smacks forehead *)  Yes, I knew that.  This spec file has been sitting around for awhile, and I completely forgot about removing the python 2 bits first.


(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #2)
> I forgot this:
> 
> 
> [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
>      must be documented in the spec.
> 
> 
> Please detail what licenses cover which parts in a comment.

Done.  FYI, here is what I will actually import:

Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/libgpuarray/libgpuarray.spec
SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/libgpuarray/libgpuarray-0.7.6-1.fc30.src.rpm

Thank you for the review!

Comment 4 Gwyn Ciesla 2018-10-05 13:27:00 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libgpuarray

Comment 5 Jerry James 2018-10-07 00:51:40 UTC
Built in Rawhide.


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