Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/utils/watchman.spec SRPM URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/utils/watchman-2020.09.21.00-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Watchman exists to watch files and record when they actually change. It can also trigger actions (such as rebuilding assets) when matching files change. Fedora Account System Username: salimma
Rpmlint ------- Checking: watchman-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm python3-watchman-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm watchman-debuginfo-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm watchman-debugsource-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm watchman-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.src.rpm watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-diag watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-make watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-replicate-subscription watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-wait python3-watchman.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: watchman-debuginfo-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-diag watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-make watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-replicate-subscription watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-wait python3-watchman.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Unversioned so-files -------------------- python3-watchman: /usr/lib64/python3.9/site-packages/pywatchman/bser.cpython-39-x86_64-linux-gnu.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/facebook/watchman/archive/v2020.09.21.00/watchman-2020.09.21.00.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3129e0088aadb6c6367d087a7bd4b1020b38426b01d848f19e0b5faeff3d2620 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3129e0088aadb6c6367d087a7bd4b1020b38426b01d848f19e0b5faeff3d2620 Requires -------- watchman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) libfmt.so.7()(64bit) libfolly.so.2020.11.09.00()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libglog.so.0()(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_1.3.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) python3-watchman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) watchman(x86-64) watchman-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): watchman-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- watchman: watchman watchman(x86-64) python3-watchman: python-watchman python3-watchman python3-watchman(x86-64) python3.9-watchman python3.9dist(pywatchman) python3dist(pywatchman) watchman-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) watchman-debuginfo watchman-debuginfo(x86-64) watchman-debugsource: watchman-debugsource watchman-debugsource(x86-64)
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== 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]: 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", "Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "Expat License Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* [generated file]", "Expat License BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License", "Expat License", "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "Boost Software License". 381 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ngompa/1896590-watchman/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. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [!]: 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 2 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 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]: 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: [x]: 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 python3-watchman [x]: 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. [-]: 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. [-]: %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: watchman-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm python3-watchman-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm watchman-debuginfo-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm watchman-debugsource-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm watchman-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.src.rpm watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-diag watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-make watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-replicate-subscription watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-wait python3-watchman.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: watchman-debuginfo-2020.09.21.00-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-diag watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-make watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-replicate-subscription watchman.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary watchman-wait python3-watchman.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Unversioned so-files -------------------- python3-watchman: /usr/lib64/python3.9/site-packages/pywatchman/bser.cpython-39-x86_64-linux-gnu.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/facebook/watchman/archive/v2020.09.21.00/watchman-2020.09.21.00.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3129e0088aadb6c6367d087a7bd4b1020b38426b01d848f19e0b5faeff3d2620 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3129e0088aadb6c6367d087a7bd4b1020b38426b01d848f19e0b5faeff3d2620 Requires -------- watchman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) libfmt.so.7()(64bit) libfolly.so.2020.11.09.00()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libglog.so.0()(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_1.3.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) python3-watchman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) watchman(x86-64) watchman-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): watchman-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- watchman: watchman watchman(x86-64) python3-watchman: python-watchman python3-watchman python3-watchman(x86-64) python3.9-watchman python3.9dist(pywatchman) python3dist(pywatchman) watchman-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) watchman-debuginfo watchman-debuginfo(x86-64) watchman-debugsource: watchman-debugsource watchman-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1896590 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Perl, fonts, Haskell, Ocaml, PHP, SugarActivity, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Review notes: > [!]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. This is not true, since folly still has an ExcludeArch: s390x. Please fill that in appropriately. > [!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. See above. Spec file review notes: > %{python3_sitearch}/py%{name}-?.?.?-py%{python3_version}.egg-info This version should match with the main package. According to the metadata, the version is 1.4.1 instead of 2020.09.21.00. This is problematic because the versioning is incoherent across different components produced by the same source package, which can make upgrades and automatic dependencies problematic later on. Either change the Python bindings version to match the main one, or change the main version to match the Python bindings, but there should be only *one* version scheme here.
Few things for the TODO list (not necessarily review blocking IMO): - watchman can link to pcre, so you'll wanna add that to the BR - watchman ships bindings for a bunch of other languages (node, java, ruby, rust, etc.); we should package these as well - related, I think we may want BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON and to ship the shared libs in their own watchman-libs package, otherwise all bindings will end up linking statically; similar to folly and friends, we also probably want to ship watchman-static
(In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #4) > - related, I think we may want BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON and to ship the shared > libs in their own watchman-libs package, otherwise all bindings will end up > linking statically; similar to folly and friends, we also probably want to > ship watchman-static That's the first thing I initially did, but Watchman seems to ship no libraries at all, shared or static.
Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/utils/watchman.spec SRPM URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/utils/watchman-2020.09.21.00-2.fc33.src.rpm - Support enabling tests - Add ExcludeArch on s390x for Folly dependency - Rename Python subpackage - Fix version number and licensing for Python subpackage - Move Python scripts to the Python subpackage (In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #4) > Few things for the TODO list (not necessarily review blocking IMO): > - watchman can link to pcre, so you'll wanna add that to the BR done > - watchman ships bindings for a bunch of other languages (node, java, ruby, > rust, etc.); we should package these as well TODO
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #5) > (In reply to Davide Cavalca from comment #4) > > - related, I think we may want BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON and to ship the shared > > libs in their own watchman-libs package, otherwise all bindings will end up > > linking statically; similar to folly and friends, we also probably want to > > ship watchman-static > > That's the first thing I initially did, but Watchman seems to ship no > libraries at all, shared or static. That seems like something is broken in the watchman build...?
I'd like to see this build fixed so that the shared libraries are built. Obviously library code exists for the Python bindings to compile with, and as Watchman has quite a few more, it makes sense to expose that as libraries everything can use.
From the upstream developer: "The cmake build only builds watchman + python. The python bits are really only included in there to enable building tools like watchman-make and watchman-wait. We plan to replace those with tools implemented in rust in the not too distant future." "The various other language bindings are distributed through their respective primary distribution points; the nodejs library is published to npm, the pywatchman bindings to pypi. The ruby bindings are unmaintained; they were added by a former FB employee to support their vim/ruby plugin. The rust crate is published to crates.io." "There is a C++ client library in the repo but it doesn't get built or installed for anything outside of hhvm." "they (the language bindings) use a unix domain socket to talk to the server. There's a handshake they do to discover the socket; they shell out to watchman get-sockname for that, but other than that those language bindings are self contained and don't link to any external deps" So I guess there are no shared libraries to be built
Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/utils/watchman.spec SRPM URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/utils/watchman-2020.09.21.00-3.fc33.src.rpm -2: add ExcludeArch -3: updated patch, also package Watchman's state directory
Then we're good to go. PACKAGE APPROVED.
Thanks Neal! ❯ fedpkg request-repo watchman 1896590 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/30719
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/watchman
FEDORA-2020-fd7b7bf8c8 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-fd7b7bf8c8
FEDORA-2020-10c85632d9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-10c85632d9
FEDORA-2020-10c85632d9 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-2020-10c85632d9` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-10c85632d9 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-fd7b7bf8c8 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 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-fd7b7bf8c8` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-fd7b7bf8c8 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-fd7b7bf8c8 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2020-10c85632d9 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.