Bug 1953340 - Review Request: dovecot-fts-xapian - Xapian plugin for Dovecot
Summary: Review Request: dovecot-fts-xapian - Xapian plugin for Dovecot
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin 🐧
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-04-25 15:17 UTC by Joan Moreau
Modified: 2024-01-28 08:11 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2024-01-28 08:11:31 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
zebob.m: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Joan Moreau 2021-04-25 15:17:32 UTC
Spec URL: https://github.com/grosjo/fts-xapian/blob/master/PACKAGES/RPM/fts-xapian.spec
SRPM URL: https://github.com/grosjo/fts-xapian/blob/master/PACKAGES/RPM/dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.9b-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: This project intends to provide a straightforward, simple and maintenance free, way to configure FTS plugin for Dovecot, leveraging the efforts by the Xapian.org team.

This effort came after Dovecot team decided to deprecate "fts_squat" included in the dovecot core, and due to the complexity of the Solr plugin capabilitles, un-needed for most users.

This is my first package, and I am seeking a sponsor.

Fedora Account System Username: grosjo

Blocks : FE-NEEDSPONSOR

Comment 1 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2021-05-08 18:43:57 UTC
 - You must include a license file and should include any documentation:

%files
%license COPYING
%doc AUTHORS README.md
%{_libdir}/dovecot/lib21_fts_xapian_plugin.so

 - Please include a valid changelog entry with your name and stuff:

%changelog
* Tue Apr  6 2021 Joan Moreau <jom> - 1.49b-1
- Initial RPM

 - The SPEC filename, the SPEC name, and the bug report name must be the same. Please change the filename of the spec to match the rest.

 - The Source0 is 404:

Downloading: https://github.com/grosjo/fts-xapian/archive/refs/tags/fts-xapian-1.4.9b.tar.gz
Download failed:
404 Client Error: Not Found for url: https://codeload.github.com/grosjo/fts-xapian/tar.gz/refs/tags/fts-xapian-1.4.9b
-   0.0 B Elapsed Time: 0:00:00   

 Please use instead:

Source0:        %{url}/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

 - Typo in description:

 spelling-error %description -l en_US capabilitles -> capabilities, capability


 - [!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
     Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment.
     See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools

AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found
------------------------------
  AC_PROG_LIBTOOL found in: fts-xapian-1.4.9b/configure.ac:22


AC_PROG_LIBTOOL should be replaced with LT_INIT.

See https://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual/html_node/LT_005fINIT.html




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.
[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.
[!]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU Lesser General Public License,
     Version 2.1". 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/dovecot-fts-xapian/review-
     dovecot-fts-xapian/licensecheck.txt
[!]: 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]: 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]: 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]: 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:
[-]: 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.
[-]: 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.
[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]: 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:
[!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros
     Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment.
     See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools
[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: dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.9b-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
          dovecot-fts-xapian-debuginfo-1.4.9b-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
          dovecot-fts-xapian-debugsource-1.4.9b-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
          dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.9b-1.fc35.src.rpm
dovecot-fts-xapian.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US capabilitles -> capabilities, capability
dovecot-fts-xapian.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US un -> UN, nu, in
dovecot-fts-xapian.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog apian ['1.4.9b-1.fc35', '1.4.9b-1']
dovecot-fts-xapian.x86_64: W: no-documentation
dovecot-fts-xapian.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US capabilitles -> capabilities, capability
dovecot-fts-xapian.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US un -> UN, nu, in
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.

Comment 2 Joan Moreau 2021-06-26 18:07:32 UTC
Can you check updates ?

https://github.com/grosjo/fts-xapian/tree/1.4.10/PACKAGES/RPM

Thank you

Comment 3 Joan Moreau 2021-06-26 18:41:07 UTC
Uploading srpm: ./dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm
[====================================] 100% 00:00:11 999.95 KiB  86.34 KiB/sec
Created task: 70868316
Task info: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=70868316
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
70868316 build (f34, dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm): free
70868316 build (f34, dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm): free -> open (buildvm-x86-09.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  70868321 rebuildSRPM (noarch): free
  70868321 rebuildSRPM (noarch): free -> open (buildvm-x86-17.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  70868403 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, i686): free
  70868405 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, x86_64): free
  70868410 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, s390x): open (buildvm-s390x-22.s390.fedoraproject.org)
  70868402 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, armv7hl): open (buildvm-a32-12.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  70868407 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, aarch64): open (buildvm-a64-26.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  70868408 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, ppc64le): open (buildvm-ppc64le-04.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  70868321 rebuildSRPM (noarch): open (buildvm-x86-17.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  2 free  5 open  1 done  0 failed
  70868403 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, i686): free -> open (buildvm-x86-07.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  70868405 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, x86_64): free -> open (buildvm-x86-03.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  70868410 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, s390x): open (buildvm-s390x-22.s390.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  6 open  2 done  0 failed
  70868403 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, i686): open (buildvm-x86-07.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  5 open  3 done  0 failed
  70868405 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, x86_64): open (buildvm-x86-03.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  4 open  4 done  0 failed
  70868408 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, ppc64le): open (buildvm-ppc64le-04.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  3 open  5 done  0 failed
  70868407 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, aarch64): open (buildvm-a64-26.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  2 open  6 done  0 failed
  70868402 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm, armv7hl): open (buildvm-a32-12.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  1 open  7 done  0 failed

70868316 build (f34, dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm): open (buildvm-x86-09.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  0 open  8 done  0 failed

70868316 build (f34, dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.10-1.fc34.src.rpm) completed succes

Comment 5 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2021-06-27 12:41:16 UTC
Sorry I seem to have missed this bug in my mail. Don't hesitate to use Needinfo in this casd.


The package is approved. However you still nedd to find a sponsor to be aloozed into the packager group, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group

Comment 6 Joan Moreau 2021-07-02 20:32:29 UTC
In practical terms, how to move forward ("get a sponsor" is just a foggy stuff -> I am just willing to resolve a request (https://github.com/grosjo/fts-xapian/issues/82 ), not planning to "show my expertise" 

What is "needinfo" ?

Can you help with moving this forward ?

Or how can I sponsor myself ?

Comment 7 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2021-07-02 20:52:40 UTC
(In reply to Joan Moreau from comment #6)
> In practical terms, how to move forward ("get a sponsor" is just a foggy
> stuff -> I am just willing to resolve a request
> (https://github.com/grosjo/fts-xapian/issues/82 ), not planning to "show my
> expertise" 
> 

We don't just allow anybody into the packager group, you need to be vetted, by showing you understand the packaging guidelines,

> What is "needinfo" ?

Below the reply text area, there is a check box with "Need additional information from"

> 
> Can you help with moving this forward ?
> 

I've sent you a mail regarding sponsorship but I haven't heard back from you.

Comment 9 Joan Moreau 2021-07-03 20:09:07 UTC
I don't really plan to "show my worth" but just willing to maintain this small and usefull package

Comment 10 Joan Moreau 2021-08-20 10:36:16 UTC
ANyone can help to push this RPM into the reps ?
thank you

Comment 11 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2021-08-22 11:57:15 UTC
Hi Joan,

I've sponsored you to the package maintainers group now. Welcome to the the community!

Please log in (or back out and in if necessary) to src.fedoraproject.org. That triggers a sync with the accounts system and will give you the necessary permissions.

You can now continue from here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner

Please feel free to e-mail me if you need any help with your package(s).

Cheers,
Ankur

Comment 12 Joan Moreau 2021-08-22 12:05:15 UTC
Hi Ankur,

Trying to login in https://src.fedoraproject.org/ as mentioned on the link you sent

I get:
OpenID request was cancelled

Comment 13 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2021-08-22 12:23:38 UTC
Infrastructure is currently seeing intermittent issues with the Fedora Open ID server.

See https://status.fedoraproject.org/ and https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9990

Someone has reported: "Clearing the local storage and cookies, seems to fix the problem most of the times.", try that and see if it works?

Comment 14 Joan Moreau 2021-08-22 12:26:14 UTC
yes did that
using Firefox 91 (archlinux)
same result

Comment 15 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2021-08-22 13:09:32 UTC
Sorry, you'll have to try later. Not much I can do with the infra issue :/

I tend to always be logged in using SSO, so I haven't run this into this yet. Try that perhaps:
https://fedoramagazine.org/set-up-single-sign-on-for-fedora-project-services/

You should also be able to get a Kubernetes ticket using the command line:

kinit <username>@FEDORAPROJECT.ORG

More info here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/Kerberos

Comment 16 Joan Moreau 2021-08-22 18:58:31 UTC
I managed to log in

I reach the following screen



    grosjo
    Packages  
    0
    Activity 
    Groups 
    1
    Watchlist 
    0

My Packages
You have no Packages

Comment 17 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2021-08-23 08:47:34 UTC
Great. You're in:

https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/grosjo

you can now proceed with requesting the SCM repository for your package and so on:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner

Cheers,

Comment 18 Joan Moreau 2021-08-23 18:32:53 UTC
$ fedpkg request-repo dovecot-fts-xapian 1953340
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/36466

Comment 19 Gwyn Ciesla 2021-08-23 18:47:46 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian

Comment 20 Joan Moreau 2021-08-24 07:26:00 UTC
I get:

$ fedpkg clone dovecot-fts-xapian
Cloning into 'dovecot-fts-xapian'...
grosjo.org: Permission denied (publickey).
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
Could not execute clone: Failed to execute command.

Comment 21 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2021-08-24 08:16:57 UTC
The clone works for me, so the repo seems to be set up correctly.

I can't check on the account system if you uploaded your public SSH key there, so that'll be the first thing to check.

Then, if you have multiple keys (for example I have a separate one for Fedora tasks), you'll have to configure ssh to point out what key you are using for what service. So, your ~/.ssh/config file will have something like this in it:

HOST *.fedoraproject.org fedorapeople.org *.pagure.io
    IdentityFile <full path to your private ssh key file>
    User <your Fedora username>

Comment 22 Joan Moreau 2021-08-28 11:09:39 UTC
Ok, it works now.
I get a forlder with a README.md in it

WHat shall I do with it ?

Comment 23 Joan Moreau 2021-08-28 11:32:45 UTC
Regenerating my SRPM file, I get

error: Failed build dependencies:
	gcc-c++ is needed by dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc34.x86_64

WHereas it was working fine some weeks ago

Comment 24 Joan Moreau 2021-08-28 11:52:20 UTC
log on hte build also shows another error (and I have no power over it)

DEBUG util.py:446:  Created symlink /etc/systemd/system/dbus.service → /usr/lib/systemd/system/dbus-broker.service.
DEBUG util.py:446:  Created symlink /etc/systemd/user/dbus.service → /usr/lib/systemd/user/dbus-broker.service.
DEBUG util.py:446:  useradd warning: dovecot's uid 97 outside of the SYS_UID_MIN 201 and SYS_UID_MAX 999 range.
DEBUG util.py:444:  Error in POSTIN scriptlet in rpm package dovecot

Comment 26 Joan Moreau 2021-08-28 16:14:47 UTC
I managed to solve the "gcc-c++" error

Package building works fine on my VM (using "QA_RPATHS=$(( 0x0001|0x0010 )) rpmbuild --bb --nodebuginfo ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/dovecot-fts-xapian.spec")

When using "fedpkg build" -> I get errors
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=74684272

Comment 27 Joan Moreau 2021-08-28 16:44:58 UTC
I added "%global __brp_check_rpaths %{nil}" in the spec file according to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Broken_RPATH_will_fail_rpmbuild

This fixed the issue

So I get the following. What is next ?


Building dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36 for rawhide
Created task: 74686191
Task info: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=74686191
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
74686191 build (rawhide, /rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian.git:27e075a3e72251a9b46d43524041ad441e38430f): free
74686191 build (rawhide, /rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian.git:27e075a3e72251a9b46d43524041ad441e38430f): free -> open (buildvm-s390x-24.s390.fedoraproject.org)
  74686194 buildSRPMFromSCM (/rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian.git:27e075a3e72251a9b46d43524041ad441e38430f): open (buildvm-ppc64le-40.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  74686458 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, armv7hl): open (buildvm-a32-19.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  74686462 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, ppc64le): free
  74686459 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, i686): open (buildhw-x86-13.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  74686461 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, aarch64): open (buildvm-a64-27.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  74686460 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, x86_64): open (buildhw-x86-13.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  74686463 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, s390x): open (buildvm-s390x-23.s390.fedoraproject.org)
  74686194 buildSRPMFromSCM (/rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian.git:27e075a3e72251a9b46d43524041ad441e38430f): open (buildvm-ppc64le-40.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  1 free  6 open  1 done  0 failed
  74686462 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, ppc64le): free -> open (buildvm-ppc64le-21.iad2.fedoraproject.org)
  74686459 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, i686): open (buildhw-x86-13.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  6 open  2 done  0 failed
  74686460 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, x86_64): open (buildhw-x86-13.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  5 open  3 done  0 failed
  74686463 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, s390x): open (buildvm-s390x-23.s390.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  4 open  4 done  0 failed
  74686462 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, ppc64le): open (buildvm-ppc64le-21.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  3 open  5 done  0 failed
  74686461 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, aarch64): open (buildvm-a64-27.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  2 open  6 done  0 failed
74686191 build (rawhide, /rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian.git:27e075a3e72251a9b46d43524041ad441e38430f): open (buildvm-s390x-24.s390.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  1 open  7 done  0 failed
  74686650 tagBuild (noarch): closed
  74686458 buildArch (dovecot-fts-xapian-1.4.12-1.fc36.src.rpm, armv7hl): open (buildvm-a32-19.iad2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
  0 free  0 open  9 done  0 failed

74686191 build (rawhide, /rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian.git:27e075a3e72251a9b46d43524041ad441e38430f) completed successfully

Comment 28 Joan Moreau 2021-08-29 10:10:52 UTC
If all this is OK, how to push the RPM to f34 et f35 ?

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian

Comment 29 Christoph Karl 2021-08-29 10:14:47 UTC
Maybe this URL is of help:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintenance_guide

Comment 30 Joan Moreau 2021-08-29 10:39:45 UTC
Pb is as follows:

$ fedpkg switch-branch f35
Could not execute switch_branch: Unknown remote branch origin/f35

Comment 32 Joan Moreau 2021-08-31 05:43:28 UTC
It seems things are now working properly
Is the RPM now available in the diferent releases ? (f34/35/36/epel7/epel8) ?

Comment 33 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2021-08-31 10:44:59 UTC
Hi Joan,

For all branches other than rawhide, you need to:

- request a branch
- build your package
- push an update

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=34417 shows that you've built for F34/F35/F36 but I don't see updates for F34/F35 yet, so that will be the next step there:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=dovecot-fts-xapian

Please see the links given for commands and so on:

- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintenance_guide
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Submit_Package_as_Update_in_Bodhi

Your build for el7 failed, so you'll have to fix that and then push an update etc.

Please do note that the guidelines and pipeline for EL are not identical to Fedora releases, so if you are looking to make your packages available on EL, you also need to take a look at their guidelines:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL:Packaging


Additional note:
Since you're opting out of the rpath check, you need to add a comment to your spec explaining this (as documented here):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Broken_RPATH_will_fail_rpmbuild#Opting_out

https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dovecot-fts-xapian/blob/rawhide/f/dovecot-fts-xapian.spec#_1

The guideline for rpath is here:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_beware_of_rpath

(As noted there also, if it's just an internal library, noting that is sufficient)

Cheers,

Comment 34 Joan Moreau 2021-09-01 18:55:31 UTC
Hi

I understood that bottom line, I need to type "fedpkg update" , right ?

I get :
$ git checkout f35
Switched to branch 'f35'
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/f35'.
$ fedpkg update
Could not execute update: Could not generate update request: Missing update type, which is required to create update.
A copy of the filled in template is saved as bodhi.template.last


What should I do ?

thank you

Comment 35 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2021-09-02 08:26:42 UTC
Take a look at `fedpkg update --help`. Without any arguments, it should open up a text editor for you to fill in the template interactively. It may look at your $EDITOR environment variable to figure out what editor to use. Worth checking if that is set.

You can also use the bodhi web-interface to push updates. I prefer this for new packages because you can add all the new builds there and it'll split it into different updates for each Fedora release itself. Using `fedpkg update`, you'll have to run it for each branch manually.

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/new

Cheers,

Comment 36 Joan Moreau 2021-11-12 13:23:48 UTC
HI

I am trying to update the package.

Nothing works anymore.

I am trying

> fedpkg prep

I get : 
> sources file doesn't exist. Source files download skipped.
> error: Bad source: /home/joan/fts-xapian/PACKAGES/RPM/fedora/dovecot-fts-xapian/dovecot-fts-xapian-1.5.1.tar.gz: No such file or directory


Something I am doing wrong somewhere

Can you help ?

Comment 37 Joan Moreau 2021-11-12 20:47:25 UTC
I reach the following for fc35, running fedpkg build 

Teh error does /not/ happen for rawhide



Mock Version: 2.12
ENTER ['do_with_status'](['bash', '--login', '-c', '/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bs --target noarch --nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/dovecot-fts-xapian.spec'], chrootPath='/var/lib/mock/f35-build-31195302-4264299/root'env={'TERM': 'vt100', 'SHELL': '/bin/bash', 'HOME': '/builddir', 'HOSTNAME': 'mock', 'PATH': '/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin', 'PROMPT_COMMAND': 'printf "\\033]0;<mock-chroot>\\007"', 'PS1': '<mock-chroot> \\s-\\v\\$ ', 'LANG': 'C.UTF-8'}shell=Falselogger=<mockbuild.trace_decorator.getLog object at 0x7f0da746d1f0>timeout=201600uid=1000gid=425user='mockbuild'nspawn_args=[]unshare_net=FalseprintOutput=False)
Executing command: ['bash', '--login', '-c', '/usr/bin/rpmbuild -bs --target noarch --nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/dovecot-fts-xapian.spec'] with env {'TERM': 'vt100', 'SHELL': '/bin/bash', 'HOME': '/builddir', 'HOSTNAME': 'mock', 'PATH': '/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin', 'PROMPT_COMMAND': 'printf "\\033]0;<mock-chroot>\\007"', 'PS1': '<mock-chroot> \\s-\\v\\$ ', 'LANG': 'C.UTF-8'} and shell False
error: Bad source: /builddir/build/SOURCES/dovecot-fts-xapian-1.5.1.tar.gz: No such file or directory
Building target platforms: noarch
Building for target noarch
Child return code was: 1
EXCEPTION: [Error()]
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/mockbuild/trace_decorator.py", line 93, in trace
    result = func(*args, **kw)
  File "/usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/mockbuild/util.py", line 600, in do_with_status
    raise exception.Error("Command failed: \n # %s\n%s" % (command, output), child.returncode)
mockbuild.exception.Error: Command failed: 
 # bash --login -c /usr/bin/rpmbuild -bs --target noarch --nodeps /builddir/build/SPECS/dovecot-fts-xapian.spec

Comment 38 Joan Moreau 2022-03-05 15:44:23 UTC
Hi

running fedpkg build recently, I reach:


configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/fts-xapian-1.5.4b':
configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
See `config.log' for more details
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.rcC7KS (%prep)
    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.rcC7KS (%prep)
RPM build errors:
Child return code was: 1
EXCEPTION: [Error()]


details here : 
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6697/83686697/build.log

Can you help ?
Thank you

Comment 39 Package Review 2024-01-28 08:11:31 UTC
The package is now orphaned, closing this old review ticket.


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