Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/sagitter/ForTesting/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02197332-amg4psblas/amg4psblas.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/sagitter/ForTesting/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02197332-amg4psblas/amg4psblas-1.0.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: This package obsoletes mld2p4 package and requires psblas3-3.7.0.1 to be compiled. psblas3-3.7.0.1 is available in Copr and will be pushed in Fedora when this package will be approved. Fedora Account System Username: sagitter
- I would drop all the things within the debug condition. The %configure is already set up with -g to generate debug infos. - To avoid unintentional soname bump, we recommend not globbing the major soname version of shared libraries, be more specific instead. %{_libdir}/*.so.* %{_libdir}/openmpi/lib/*.so.* %{_libdir}/mpich/lib/*.so.* - What part of the program is MIT? Could you explain the license breakdown in a comment above the License: field? - Source is 404: the v before %{version} should be capitalized: Source0: https://github.com/sfilippone/amg4psblas/archive/V%{version}%{?postrelease_version}/amg4psblas-%{version}%{?postrelease_version}.tar.gz - I can't build it, some dependencies are missing: DEBUG util.py:446: Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:19 ago on Tue May 18 21:38:20 2021. DEBUG util.py:444: No matching package to install: 'psblas3-mpich-devel >= 3.7.0.1' DEBUG util.py:444: No matching package to install: 'psblas3-openmpi-devel >= 3.7.0.1' DEBUG util.py:444: No matching package to install: 'psblas3-serial-devel >= 3.7.0.1' DEBUG util.py:444: Not all dependencies satisfied DEBUG util.py:444: Error: Some packages could not be found. Your pblas3 in Rawhide is only 3.6.1 and you need at least 3.7.0. Could you update it?
- OK, CMU license → MIT - Make common noarch since it,s only provides the docs. Maybe add a provide as a doc subpackage. - Not sure who should own this? MAybe add a Requires of the package which supposedly own it Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 2652160 bytes in 60 files. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_documentation ===== 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. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. 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", "CMU License", "FSF Unlimited License [generated file]", "NTP License [generated file]", "*No copyright* [generated file]", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License". 390 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/amg4psblas/review- amg4psblas/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. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/gfortran [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. [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 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: [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [-]: 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 amg4psblas-serial , amg4psblas-serial-devel , amg4psblas-common , amg4psblas-openmpi , amg4psblas-openmpi-devel , amg4psblas-mpich , amg4psblas-mpich-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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %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: amg4psblas-serial-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-serial-devel-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-common-1.0.0-1.fc35.noarch.rpm amg4psblas-openmpi-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-openmpi-devel-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-mpich-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-mpich-devel-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-debuginfo-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-debugsource-1.0.0-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm amg4psblas-1.0.0-1.fc35.src.rpm amg4psblas-serial.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized C amg4psblas serial mode amg4psblas-serial.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preconditioners -> preconditions, precondition, conditioners amg4psblas-serial.x86_64: W: no-documentation amg4psblas-serial-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation amg4psblas-openmpi.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preconditioners -> preconditions, precondition, conditioners amg4psblas-openmpi.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/openmpi/lib/libamg_prec.so.1.0 exit.5 amg4psblas-openmpi.x86_64: W: no-documentation amg4psblas-openmpi-devel.x86_64: W: description-shorter-than-summary amg4psblas-openmpi-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib amg4psblas-openmpi-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation amg4psblas-mpich.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preconditioners -> preconditions, precondition, conditioners amg4psblas-mpich.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libamg_prec.so.1.0 exit.5 amg4psblas-mpich.x86_64: W: no-documentation amg4psblas-mpich-devel.x86_64: W: description-shorter-than-summary amg4psblas-mpich-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib amg4psblas-mpich-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation amg4psblas.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preconditioners -> preconditions, precondition, conditioners amg4psblas.src:8: W: configure-without-libdir-spec amg4psblas.src:174: W: configure-without-libdir-spec amg4psblas.src:227: W: configure-without-libdir-spec amg4psblas.src:277: W: configure-without-libdir-spec 10 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 21 warnings.
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/sagitter/ForTesting/fedora-34-x86_64/02200259-amg4psblas/amg4psblas.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/sagitter/ForTesting/fedora-34-x86_64/02200259-amg4psblas/amg4psblas-1.0.0-2.fc34.src.rpm Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/sagitter/ForTesting/build/2200259/ - Use openblas in EPEL8 - Fix SOURCE0 link - Add Requires dependencies to PSBLAS3 - Rename common package as doc
LGTM, package approved.
Thank you.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/amg4psblas
Package is available in repositories, closing.