Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//python-numcodecs.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org//python-numcodecs-0.6.3-1.fc29.src.rpm Description: Numcodecs is a Python package providing buffer compression and transformation codecs for use in data storage and communication applications.
Source0: https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/n/%{srcname}/%{srcname}-%{version}.tar.gz → Source0: %{pypi_source} - You need to BR pytest for the tests: BuildRequires: python3dist(pytest) - Run proper tests: %check %{__python3} setup.py test PYTHONPATH=${PWD} py.test-%{python3_version} (Both commands are needed, first one builds the C code, second runs the actual tests). - The -doc subpackage should be noarch. 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. [-]: 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]: 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", "Expat License", "*No copyright* BSD (unspecified)", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "zlib/libpng license". 1408 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-numcodecs/review-python- numcodecs/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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. [+]: 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. [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 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: [-]: 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-numcodecs [?]: 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 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1187840 bytes in /usr/share [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-numcodecs-0.6.3-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm python-numcodecs-doc-0.6.3-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm python-numcodecs-debugsource-0.6.3-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm python-numcodecs-0.6.3-1.fc31.src.rpm python-numcodecs-doc.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C numcodecs documentation python-numcodecs-doc.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/python-numcodecs-doc/html/_static/donotdelete 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Ok I think you should fix the SPEC like this with an additionnal build command: %build CFLAGS="${CFLAGS:-${RPM_OPT_FLAGS}}" LDFLAGS="${LDFLAGS:-${RPM_LD_FLAGS}}" %{__python3} %{py_setup} %{?py_setup_args} build_ext --inplace %py3_build # generate html docs PYTHONPATH=${PWD} sphinx-build-3 docs html # remove the sphinx-build leftovers rm -rf html/.{doctrees,buildinfo} %install %py3_install %check PYTHONPATH=${PWD} py.test-%{python3_version} No need for the additional %{__python3} setup.py test like before.
Fixed. No need for double-building; %check is run after %install. Spec URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/python-numcodecs.spec SRPM URL: https://qulogic.fedorapeople.org/python-numcodecs-0.6.3-2.fc29.src.rpm
Ok package approved.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-numcodecs
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-2.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-d03cf47674
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-2.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-c8e5057d70
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-2.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-92e5900abf
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-3.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 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-2019-c8e5057d70
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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-2019-d03cf47674
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-3.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 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-2019-92e5900abf
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-3.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-numcodecs-0.6.3-3.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.