Bug 1853120 - Review request: zlib-ng - a zlib implementation with optimizations
Summary: Review request: zlib-ng - a zlib implementation with optimizations
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin 🐧
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-07-02 03:06 UTC by Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho
Modified: 2020-07-10 00:44 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-07-10 00:44:37 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:
zebob.m: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho 2020-07-02 03:06:22 UTC
SPEC URL: https://pagure.io/zlib-ng/blob/master/f/zlib-ng.spec
SRPM URL: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8707/46448707/zlib-ng-1.9.9-0.20200609gitfe69810c2.fc33.src.rpm

Description: zlib-ng is a fork of zlib that has been getting traction by providing optimizations to recent processors of the architectures aarch64, ppc64le, s390x and x86_64.
These optimizations benefit from SIMD or specific instructions provided by the processors, e.g. s390x DFLTCC.

Fedora Account System Username: tuliom

Koji builds are available here:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46448706

Comment 1 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2020-07-02 17:10:55 UTC
 - Please name your archive better:

Source0:	https://github.com/zlib-ng/zlib-ng/archive/%{commit}/%{name}-%{shortcommit}.tar.gz

 - Release should start at 0.1 for prerelease:

	
Release:	0.1.%{commitdate}git%{shortcommit}%{?dist}

 - Please make the Require arch-dependent with isa:

%package	devel
Summary:	Development files for %{name}
Requires:	%{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}

 - Not needed anymore except for EPEL7:

%ldconfig_scriptlets

 - Please add your own changelog entry

 - Please glob the extension for man pages as the compression may change in the future:

%{_mandir}/man3/%{name}.3.*

 - UNversioned libraries go to the -devel subpackage:

%files devel
%{_includedir}/zconf-ng.h
%{_includedir}/zlib-ng.h
%{_libdir}/libz-ng.so	
%{_datadir}/pkgconfig/%{name}.pc
%{_mandir}/man3/%{name}.3.*

Comment 2 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2020-07-02 17:34:21 UTC
	
License:	Zlib → License:	zlib



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: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_devel_packages


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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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", "zlib/libpng license", "*No copyright*
     zlib/libpng license". 152 files have unknown license. Detailed output
     of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/zlib-ng/review-zlib-
     ng/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.
[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 20480 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]: 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]: 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).
[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in zlib-ng-
     devel
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: %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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: zlib-ng-1.9.9-0.20200609gitfe69810c2.fc33.x86_64.rpm
          zlib-ng-devel-1.9.9-0.20200609gitfe69810c2.fc33.x86_64.rpm
          zlib-ng-debuginfo-1.9.9-0.20200609gitfe69810c2.fc33.x86_64.rpm
          zlib-ng-debugsource-1.9.9-0.20200609gitfe69810c2.fc33.x86_64.rpm
          zlib-ng-1.9.9-0.20200609gitfe69810c2.fc33.src.rpm
zlib-ng.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C zlib replacement with optimizations
zlib-ng.x86_64: E: no-changelogname-tag
zlib-ng.x86_64: W: invalid-license Zlib
zlib-ng.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libz-ng.so
zlib-ng-devel.x86_64: E: no-changelogname-tag
zlib-ng-devel.x86_64: W: invalid-license Zlib
zlib-ng-debuginfo.x86_64: E: no-changelogname-tag
zlib-ng-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-license Zlib
zlib-ng-debugsource.x86_64: E: no-changelogname-tag
zlib-ng-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-license Zlib
zlib-ng.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C zlib replacement with optimizations
zlib-ng.src: E: no-changelogname-tag
zlib-ng.src: W: invalid-license Zlib
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 8 warnings.

Comment 3 Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho 2020-07-07 01:24:07 UTC
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #1)
>  - Please name your archive better:

That's much better!
Fixed.

>  - Release should start at 0.1 for prerelease:

Fixed.

>  - Please make the Require arch-dependent with isa:

Done.

>  - Not needed anymore except for EPEL7:
> 
> %ldconfig_scriptlets

Removed.

>  - Please add your own changelog entry

Done.

>  - Please glob the extension for man pages as the compression may change in
> the future:

Done.

>  - UNversioned libraries go to the -devel subpackage:
Done.

New Koji builds are available here:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=46714873

SPEC URL: https://pagure.io/zlib-ng/blob/master/f/zlib-ng.spec
SRPM URL: https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/4875/46714875/zlib-ng-1.9.9-0.1.20200609gitfe69810c2.fc33.src.rpm

Thanks!

Comment 4 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2020-07-07 11:52:05 UTC
 Consider using to the new cmake macros, %cmake_build and %cmake_install instead of %make_build and %make_install

This change is currently applied to F33: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/CMake_to_do_out-of-source_builds

Package approved.

Comment 5 Igor Raits 2020-07-08 09:46:17 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/zlib-ng

Comment 6 Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho 2020-07-10 00:44:37 UTC
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #4)
>  Consider using to the new cmake macros, %cmake_build and %cmake_install
> instead of %make_build and %make_install

Done.

The package has been built and I think we can close this now.

Thanks!


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