Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/switchtec/switchtec.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/switchtec/switchtec-3.0-1.fc37.src.rpm Description: Easy to use CLI and C library for communicating with Microsemi's Switchtec management interface. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=83238716
Two issues: - the binary is statically linked - please file an issue and comment in the spec, but that part is OK for now - shouldn't -devel depend on one of the other subpackages? Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [!]: Package contains no static executables. => binary linked against static version of its own libs. not a blocker as it comes from the same package, but very janky - please file an issue (preferably a PR) and link it [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", "MIT License", "FSF Unlimited License [generated file]", "*No copyright* MIT License". 18 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/dcavalca/2057654-switchtec/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [-]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/bash- completion(poetry, datamash, zypper, smc-tools, lightdm, buildah, hstr, zola, pcp, libmbim-utils, cowsay, alacritty, mt-st, mdbtools, eg, gh, rpmdevtools, sway, xca, ripgrep, ethtool, rpmspectool, toolbox, bodhi-cli, driverctl, swayidle, mercurial, docker-compose, rubygem-ronn-ng, stratis-cli, docopt, breezy, fx-completion, tio, clevis, subversion, linode-cli, bash-completion, hashcat, dnf, croc, doctl, gopass, calf, flatpak, vcsh, devscripts-checkbashisms, exa, chatty, python3-streamlink, libqmi-utils, bodhi-client, ldc, lmms, golang-github-tdewolff-minify, mtr, exercism, tealdeer, python3-trezor, osslsigncode, vagrant, dotnet-host, fedora-update- feedback, task, tldr, restic, swaylock, just, glib2, python-django- bash-completion, lxi-tools, source-highlight, tracker, etckeeper, unar, ModemManager, dconf-editor, policycoreutils, azure-cli, kmod, reprepro, wlogout, licensecheck, python3-catkin_tools, nitrokey-app, dosbox-staging, skim, ffsend, monotone, darcs, nnn, git-core, maven, chocolate-doom, lxc, skopeo, stress-ng, cobbler, fd-find, beaker- client, pdfgrep, vultr-cli, devscripts, playerctl, httpie, cpu-x, timew, yadifa-tools, falkon, filesystem, fedmod, fedpkg, gammu, hyperfine, git-delta, pbuilder, gpaste, python3-tqdm, bubblewrap, awscli, yadifa, zeitgeist), /usr/share/bash- completion/completions(poetry, datamash, zypper, smc-tools, lightdm, buildah, hstr, zola, libappstream-glib, pcp, libmbim-utils, cowsay, alacritty, xss-lock, mdbtools, mt-st, eg, gh, rpmdevtools, sway, xca, ripgrep, ethtool, rpmspectool, toolbox, bodhi-cli, driverctl, swayidle, mercurial, docker-compose, rubygem-ronn-ng, minipro, stratis-cli, docopt, breezy, fx-completion, tio, kompose, clevis, subversion, flameshot, linode-cli, bash-completion, guestfs-tools- bash-completion, hashcat, dnf, croc, doctl, gopass, calf, flatpak, vcsh, devscripts-checkbashisms, exa, python3-pip, chatty, python3-streamlink, libqmi-utils, bodhi-client, ldc, lmms, packit, golang-github-tdewolff-minify, nbdkit-bash-completion, mtr, exercism, tealdeer, python3-trezor, osslsigncode, vagrant, libnbd-bash- completion, calibre, dotnet-host, fedora-update-feedback, task, tldr, restic, swaylock, just, glib2, python-django-bash-completion, lxi- tools, source-highlight, tracker, etckeeper, unar, ModemManager, GMT- common, dconf-editor, azure-cli, kmod, firewalld, reprepro, nordugrid- arc-client, wlogout, licensecheck, python3-catkin_tools, nitrokey-app, dosbox-staging, skim, ffsend, monotone, darcs, tig, coccinelle-bash- completion, nnn, git-core, maven, chocolate-doom, lxc, skopeo, stress- ng, cobbler, fd-find, beaker-client, pdfgrep, vultr-cli, opensc, devscripts, playerctl, httpie, libguestfs-bash-completion, cpu-x, timew, yadifa-tools, falkon, filesystem, fedmod, fedpkg, hyperfine, firejail, gammu, git-delta, pbuilder, gpaste, python3-tqdm, bubblewrap, lastpass-cli, awscli, yadifa, zeitgeist) [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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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 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 ===== 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in switchtec-libs , switchtec-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. [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]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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 ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/Microsemi/switchtec-user/archive/v3.0/switchtec-user-3.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 08eaafc6831e8fde751503ed82e7f82b15a38b6f53ea631ed340baa65af622bc CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 08eaafc6831e8fde751503ed82e7f82b15a38b6f53ea631ed340baa65af622bc Requires -------- switchtec (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libncurses.so.6()(64bit) libtinfo.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) switchtec-libs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) switchtec-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libswitchtec.so.3()(64bit) switchtec-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): switchtec-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- switchtec: switchtec switchtec(x86-64) switchtec-libs: libswitchtec.so.3()(64bit) switchtec-libs switchtec-libs(x86-64) switchtec-devel: switchtec-devel switchtec-devel(x86-64) switchtec-doc: switchtec-doc switchtec-debugsource: switchtec-debugsource switchtec-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.8.0 (e988316) last change: 2022-04-07 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2057654 -m fedora-35-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-35-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic Disabled plugins: PHP, SugarActivity, Python, Perl, Ocaml, Haskell, R, Java, fonts Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
I'm not convinced that the static binary is actually an issue in this case -- the way the build system is setup, it appears to link the objects directly, so it's probably not just a matter of switching it over to the shared library, they're treated as separate targets. Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/switchtec/switchtec.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/switchtec/switchtec-3.1-1.fc37.src.rpm Changelog: - Update to 3.1 and backport a format security fix - add missing Requires for -devel package
Changes LGTM. APPROVED
Thanks! $ fedpkg request-repo switchtec 2057654 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/45346
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/switchtec
FEDORA-2022-976d00c880 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-976d00c880
FEDORA-2022-976d00c880 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2022-f0e5634fb2 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f0e5634fb2
FEDORA-2022-0930b2ac7f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-0930b2ac7f
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-072e0a0a52 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-072e0a0a52
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6557f32e4a has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6557f32e4a
FEDORA-2022-0930b2ac7f has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-0930b2ac7f \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-0930b2ac7f See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2022-f0e5634fb2 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-f0e5634fb2 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f0e5634fb2 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6557f32e4a has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6557f32e4a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-072e0a0a52 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-072e0a0a52 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2022-f0e5634fb2 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2022-0930b2ac7f has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-6557f32e4a has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-072e0a0a52 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.