Bug 1891961 - Review Request: uARMSolver - Universal Association Rule Mining Solver
Summary: Review Request: uARMSolver - Universal Association Rule Mining Solver
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: fedora-neuro, NeuroFedora
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-10-27 18:46 UTC by Iztok Fister Jr.
Modified: 2020-11-14 15:42 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-11-14 15:42:21 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
sanjay.ankur: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Iztok Fister Jr. 2020-10-27 18:46:48 UTC
Spec URL: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/blob/main/uARMSolver.spec
SRPM URL: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/blob/main/uARMSolver-0.1-1.fc32.src.rpm

Description: The framework is written fully in C++ and runs on all platforms. It allows users to preprocess their data in a transaction database, to make discretization of data, to search for association rules and to guide a presentation/visualization of the best rules found using external tools. As opposed to the existing software packages or frameworks, this also supports numerical and real-valued types of attributes besides the categorical ones. Mining the association rules is defined as an optimization and solved using the nature-inspired algorithms that can be incorporated easily. Because the algorithms normally discover a huge amount of association rules, the framework enables a modular inclusion of so-called visual guiders for extracting the knowledge hidden in data, and visualize these using external tools. 

Fedora Account System Username: iztokf

Comment 1 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2020-10-27 19:22:20 UTC
For fedora-review to be able to download the files and run checks, we need to use the "raw" links on GitHub etc.
Let's hope me pasting them also works:

Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/main/uARMSolver.spec
SRPM URL: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/raw/main/uARMSolver-0.1-1.fc32.src.rpm

Comment 2 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2020-10-27 20:11:05 UTC
Package Review
==============

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


Issues:
=======
- Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
  in the spec URL.
  Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/asinha/dump/fedora-
  reviews/1891961-uARMSolver/diff.txt
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/

^
Please ensure that the srpm is generated from the spec that you've uploaded.

- Please move to the %files section after the %install section, and before the changelog. The suggested order is:

%prep

%build

%install

%files

%changelog


- More comments below.

===== 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]: 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.
[!]: 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.
^
Please include the license file in the %files section so that they're included in the rpm. Please add this to the files section:
%license LICENSE

[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* Expat
     License". 25 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/asinha/dump/fedora-
     reviews/1891961-uARMSolver/licensecheck.txt
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
^
License not currently included.

[!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
Compiler flags are not used. Please see:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_compiler_flags

+ make
Invoking: GCC C++ Compiler
g++ -I./sources -O0 -g3 -Wall -c -fmessage-length=0 -MMD -MP -MF"Archive.d" -MT"Archive.o" -o "Archive.o" "sources/Archive.cpp"
Finished building: sources/Archive.cpp
....


This is because the Makefile hard-codes CFLAGS (but doesn't then use these), so
the Makefile needs some patching:

CFLAGS = -O0 -g3 -Wall 
...

$(CC) -I./sources -O0 -g3 -Wall -c -fmessage-length=0 -MMD -MP -MF"$(@:%.o=%.d)" -MT"$(@)" -o "$@" "$<"
^
Should use $CFLAGS


[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
^
The changlog should say 0.1-1 (version-release), since for each release a new
changelog needs to be added.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#changelogs

(Also pointed out by rpmlint)

[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.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
^
Some issues to be looked into.

[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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 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]: 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:
[!]: Uses parallel make %{!_smp_mflags} macro.
^
Please use %make_build, which will include the -jX bit automatically 

[-]: 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).
^
Looks OK, but please double-check

[!]: Package functions as described.
^
Not tested.

[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.
[!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
^
Checked on x86_64 here, but we'll check with Koji on all arches also.

[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
^
Please add the -p flag in the install command to preserve time stamps.

[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:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
^
- Please wrap the description so that the length of each line is 80 characters at most.
  (You can run `rpmlint -i` on the spec, srpm and the generated rpms to get verbose notes.)

- Could the description be improved too? It speaks about a framework but the package provides a binary tool? So it's not really clear: is the tool the framework?

- Please include some documentation: perhaps a man page or just a text file with some instructions for users?

- Please use tabs or spaces consistently, and do not mix them.

[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: uARMSolver-0.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          uARMSolver-debuginfo-0.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          uARMSolver-debugsource-0.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          uARMSolver-0.1-1.fc34.src.rpm
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preprocess -> reprocess, p reprocess, processors
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US discretization -> discretionary, discretion, discrimination
uARMSolver.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The framework is written fully in C++ and runs on all platforms. It allows users to preprocess their data in a transaction database, to make discretization of data, to search for association rules and to guide a presentation/visualization of the best rules found using external tools. As opposed to the existing software packages or frameworks, this also supports numerical and real-valued types of attributes besides the categorical ones. Mining the association rules is defined as an optimization and solved using the nature-inspired algorithms that can be incorporated easily. Because the algorithms normally discover a huge amount of association rules, the framework enables a modular inclusion of so-called visual guiders for extracting the knowledge hidden in data, and visualize these using external tools.
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1 ['0.1-1.fc34', '0.1-1']
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: no-documentation
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary uARMSolver
uARMSolver.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preprocess -> reprocess, p reprocess, processors
uARMSolver.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US discretization -> discretionary, discretion, discrimination
uARMSolver.src: E: description-line-too-long C The framework is written fully in C++ and runs on all platforms. It allows users to preprocess their data in a transaction database, to make discretization of data, to search for association rules and to guide a presentation/visualization of the best rules found using external tools. As opposed to the existing software packages or frameworks, this also supports numerical and real-valued types of attributes besides the categorical ones. Mining the association rules is defined as an optimization and solved using the nature-inspired algorithms that can be incorporated easily. Because the algorithms normally discover a huge amount of association rules, the framework enables a modular inclusion of so-called visual guiders for extracting the knowledge hidden in data, and visualize these using external tools.
uARMSolver.src:6: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 6, tab: line 1)
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 8 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: uARMSolver-debuginfo-0.1-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
uARMSolver-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preprocess -> reprocess, p reprocess, processors
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US discretization -> discretionary, discretion, discrimination
uARMSolver.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C The framework is written fully in C++ and runs on all platforms. It allows users to preprocess their data in a transaction database, to make discretization of data, to search for association rules and to guide a presentation/visualization of the best rules found using external tools. As opposed to the existing software packages or frameworks, this also supports numerical and real-valued types of attributes besides the categorical ones. Mining the association rules is defined as an optimization and solved using the nature-inspired algorithms that can be incorporated easily. Because the algorithms normally discover a huge amount of association rules, the framework enables a modular inclusion of so-called visual guiders for extracting the knowledge hidden in data, and visualize these using external tools.
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1 ['0.1-1.fc34', '0.1-1']
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: no-documentation
uARMSolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary uARMSolver
uARMSolver-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 8 warnings.



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver/archive/uARMSolver-0.1.zip :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : a4020f9ba78527dcd2bd8e4880081f30664012519f282c3570138925bb5240a5
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2d115b6567c9051300608db976daf967830b71a80c05027822128a05340d2ff4
diff -r also reports differences


Requires
--------
uARMSolver (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

uARMSolver-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

uARMSolver-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
uARMSolver:
    uARMSolver
    uARMSolver(x86-64)

uARMSolver-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    uARMSolver-debuginfo
    uARMSolver-debuginfo(x86-64)

uARMSolver-debugsource:
    uARMSolver-debugsource
    uARMSolver-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1891961
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: Perl, fonts, Haskell, R, SugarActivity, Python, Java, PHP, Ocaml
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 3 Iztok Fister Jr. 2020-10-29 18:27:18 UTC
Dear reviewer (@ankursinha),

Thank you very much for your comments/suggestions. Provided comments helped me to improve
my SPEC file. I believe we can start another revision round.

The new version of files is available on GitHub:

SPEC: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/main/uARMSolver.spec

SRPM: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/blob/main/uARMSolver-0.1-1.fc32.src.rpm?raw=true

I am also attaching my answers to your comments. 

Issue 1: Please ensure that the srpm is generated from the spec that you've uploaded.

Answer: Done

Issue 2: Please move to the %files section after the %install section, and before the changelog.

Answer: Done

Issue 3: Please include the license file in the %files section so that they're included in the rpm. Please add this to the files section:
%license LICENSE

Answer: Done

Issue 4: This is because the Makefile hard-codes CFLAGS (but doesn't then use these), so
the Makefile needs some patching:

CFLAGS = -O0 -g3 -Wall 
...

$(CC) -I./sources -O0 -g3 -Wall -c -fmessage-length=0 -MMD -MP -MF"$(@:%.o=%.d)" -MT"$(@)" -o "$@" "$<"
^
Should use $CFLAGS

Answer: Partly done.

Issue 5: The changlog should say 0.1-1 (version-release), since for each release a new
changelog needs to be added.

Answer: Done

Issue 6: Please use %make_build, which will include the -jX bit automatically 

Done

Issue 7: Please add the -p flag in the install command to preserve time stamps.

Answer: Done

Issue 8: Please wrap the description so that the length of each line is 80 characters at most.
  (You can run `rpmlint -i` on the spec, srpm and the generated rpms to get verbose notes.)

Answer: Done

Issue 9: Could the description be improved too? It speaks about a framework but the package provides a binary tool? So it's not really clear: is the tool the framework?

Answer: Description was improved.

Issue 10: Please include some documentation: perhaps a man page or just a text file with some instructions for users?

Answer: Docs were included.

Issue 11: Please use tabs or spaces consistently, and do not mix them.

Answer: The use of tabs and spaces is now consistent.

Comment 4 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2020-10-29 18:42:19 UTC
Great, thanks! I'll complete the review when I can find the time, hopefully before the end of next week :)

Comment 5 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2020-11-09 18:56:14 UTC
URLs didn't resolve correctly, let's try this:

Spec: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/raw/main/uARMSolver.spec
Srpm: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/raw/main/uARMSolver-0.1-1.fc32.src.rpm

Comment 6 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2020-11-09 19:10:24 UTC
- Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
  in the spec URL.
  Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /home/asinha/dump/fedora-
  reviews/1891961-uARMSolver/diff.txt
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/

Please ensure that the srpm is the latest one generated from the spec.

- the necessary build flags aren't still used, so I think you'll need to use the improved Makefile.

+ /usr/bin/make -O -j8 V=1 VERBOSE=1
Invoking: GCC C++ Compiler
g++ -I./sources -O0 -g3 -Wall -c -fmessage-length=0 -MMD -MP -MF"Attribute.d" -MT"Attribute.o" -o "Attribute.o" "sources/Attribute.cpp"
Finished building: sources/Attribute.cpp
Invoking: GCC C++ Compiler
g++ -I./sources -O0 -g3 -Wall -c -fmessage-length=0 -MMD -MP -MF"Feature.d" -MT"Feature.o" -o "Feature.o" "sources/Feature.cpp"
Finished building: sources/Feature.cpp


^
This is unfortunately a blocker.

The other issues have been fixed, so this is the last one to solve.

Comment 7 Iztok Fister Jr. 2020-11-10 10:10:05 UTC
Thank you very much. 

All remaining issues have already been fixed.

The final spec file is available here: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/main/uARMSolver.spec
SRPM is here: https://github.com/firefly-cpp/uARMSolver-rpm/raw/main/uARMSolver-0.2-1.fc33.src.rpm

Comment 8 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2020-11-11 21:52:56 UTC
Looks good. XXX APPROVED XXX

Please continue from the next step here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/New_package_process_for_existing_contributors

Please drop me an e-mail if you have any issues with these steps too.

(Infra outage in progress at the moment, so this page won't be available for the next few hours).

Also, there's a change proposal to remove `make` from the default build root, so I'd add `make` to the BuildRequires now also just so you don't have to bother later.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/5QUGA5RUB4B7GABUJOMOGCX4FOTRCSKC/#R2MD3FMWORC5Y7WHH5FQNU7QE5ICYMB7

Cheers!
Ankur

Comment 9 Iztok Fister Jr. 2020-11-12 08:51:00 UTC
Hi Ankur,

Thanks very much for your help.

Best regards,
Iztok

Comment 10 Gwyn Ciesla 2020-11-12 14:32:49 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/uARMSolver


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