SPEC URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/kernelshark/kernelshark.spec SRPM URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/kernelshark/kernelshark-1.1-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Kernelshark is the GUI frontend for analyse date captured by trace-cmd. Historically it is part of trace-cmd. However, now kernelshark have different version from trace-cmd, and the upstream maintainer also mention that they willo move kernelshark into a separate repo in the future, so as the trace-cmd maintainer in Fedora, I'm filing this review to get kernelshark separated from trace-cmd. Fedora Account System Username: zsun Note for "[!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro." The trace-cmd and kernelshark project both do not support parallel compiling. If compile in parallel, it will fail randomly for missing symbol.
Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=52316193 > License: GPLv2 and LGPLv2 Is it clear which parts use which license? If so, could you indicate that in a comment above the line? > Patch0: 0001-kernel-shark-Fix-dependency-symbol-resolving-issue.patch > Patch1: 0001-Do-not-install-trace-cmd-when-only-building-kernelsh.patch I think the names of the patches explain what these are for, but if there are any upstream tickets related to these, I would add them as comments above the Patch lines. > BuildRequires: trace-cmd-libs > BuildRequires: trace-cmd-devel > BuildRequires: gcc > BuildRequires: xmlto > BuildRequires: graphviz doxygen > BuildRequires: libxml2-devel > BuildRequires: gcc-c++ > BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils > BuildRequires: libappstream-glib > BuildRequires: cmake > BuildRequires: qt5-qtbase-devel > BuildRequires: freeglut-devel > BuildRequires: json-c-devel Not a big thing, but could you sort these alphabetically? More importantly, for -devel packages which provide pkgconfig files, please use the "pkgconfig(foo)" format. > %install > libdir=%{_libdir} make libdir=%{_libdir} prefix=%{_prefix} V=1 DESTDIR=%{buildroot}/ CFLAGS="%{optflags} -D_GNU_SOURCE" LDFLAGS="%{build_ldflags} -z muldefs " BUILD_TYPE=Release install_gui Why is "libdir" also defined as an environment variable for this command? Full review below: Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - 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.LIB is not marked as %license See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text Review: Is it a license file? Somehow I don't think so. ===== 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. Review: Are these for internal use by the package? If so, they don't to be versioned. [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 successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [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* GNU General Public License (v2.0) GNU Lesser General Public License (v2.1)", "GNU Lesser General Public License", "GPL (v2 or later)". 222 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/kernelshark/kernelshark/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. Review: see, earlier comment. [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/polkit-1/actions, /usr/share/polkit-1 Review: Add Requires for polkit? [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. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [?]: 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 40960 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [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: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. Review: explained by the packager. All fine. [-]: 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. [ ]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. Review: See earlier comments. [-]: 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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. Review: please add the "-p" flag to the "make" call, since you're not using %make_build [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: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: kernelshark-1.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm kernelshark-debuginfo-1.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm kernelshark-debugsource-1.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm kernelshark-1.1-1.fc34.src.rpm kernelshark.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cmd -> cm, cad, cod kernelshark.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cmd -> cm, cad, cod kernelshark.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dat -> DAT, tad, sat kernelshark.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kernelshark kernelshark.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kshark-record kernelshark.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kshark-su-record kernelshark.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) cmd -> cm, cad, cod kernelshark.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cmd -> cm, cad, cod kernelshark.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dat -> DAT, tad, sat 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: kernelshark-debuginfo-1.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: no installed packages by name kernelshark (none): E: no installed packages by name kernelshark-debuginfo (none): E: no installed packages by name kernelshark-debugsource 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Unversioned so-files -------------------- kernelshark: /usr/lib64/kernelshark/plugins/plugin-missed_events.so kernelshark: /usr/lib64/kernelshark/plugins/plugin-sched_events.so Source checksums ---------------- https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/trace-cmd/trace-cmd.git/snapshot/trace-cmd-kernelshark-v1.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : c9bc9d70b749d54aca590858e01a1938fef52765d446953461eab7ba578f4035 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c9bc9d70b749d54aca590858e01a1938fef52765d446953461eab7ba578f4035 Requires -------- kernelshark (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/bash ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libGL.so.1()(64bit) libGLU.so.1()(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Core.so.5(Qt_5.15)(64bit) libQt5Gui.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Gui.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Network.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Network.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libQt5Widgets.so.5()(64bit) libQt5Widgets.so.5(Qt_5)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libdl.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libglut.so.3()(64bit) libjson-c.so.5()(64bit) libkshark-gui.so.1.1.0()(64bit) libkshark-plot.so.1.1.0()(64bit) libkshark.so.1.1.0()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.11)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.2)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) kernelshark-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): kernelshark-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- kernelshark: application() application(kernelshark.desktop) kernelshark kernelshark(x86-64) libkshark-gui.so.1.1.0()(64bit) libkshark-plot.so.1.1.0()(64bit) libkshark.so.1.1.0()(64bit) metainfo() metainfo(kernelshark.appdata.xml) kernelshark-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) kernelshark-debuginfo kernelshark-debuginfo(x86-64) kernelshark-debugsource: kernelshark-debugsource kernelshark-debugsource(x86-64)
(In reply to Andy Mender from comment #1) > Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=52316193 > > > License: GPLv2 and LGPLv2 > > Is it clear which parts use which license? If so, could you indicate that in > a comment above the line? They do have SPDX-License-Identifier, but I'm reluctant to add such comment. It's not differ per dir, but rather per file. Maintaining such a comment is kind of wasting time for packaging. > > %install > > libdir=%{_libdir} make libdir=%{_libdir} prefix=%{_prefix} V=1 DESTDIR=%{buildroot}/ CFLAGS="%{optflags} -D_GNU_SOURCE" LDFLAGS="%{build_ldflags} -z muldefs " BUILD_TYPE=Release install_gui > > Why is "libdir" also defined as an environment variable for this command? > That was to workaround a bug before. Just tried now it works without the environment var. Updated in-place. SPEC URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/kernelshark/kernelshark.spec SRPM URL: https://zsun.fedorapeople.org/pub/pkgs/kernelshark/kernelshark-1.1-1.fc34.src.rpm Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=52333193
> They do have SPDX-License-Identifier, but I'm reluctant to add such comment. It's not differ per dir, but rather per file. Maintaining such a comment is kind of wasting time for packaging. I think the comment you added now is sufficient, thanks! Package approved!
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/kernelshark
FEDORA-2020-e78d4f1508 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e78d4f1508
FEDORA-2020-e78d4f1508 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-e78d4f1508` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-e78d4f1508 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-e78d4f1508 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.