Spec URL: https://kalev.fedorapeople.org/fedmod.spec SRPM URL: https://kalev.fedorapeople.org/fedmod-0.6.5-2.fc37.src.rpm Description: fedmod provides tools for converting existing RPMs (most notably metapackages) into module definitions in Fedora's modulemd format. Fedora Account System Username: kalev This is a review request for bringing back fedmod that got retired due to FTBFS. I am unsure how useful it is for general modularity packaging but it is still needed for producing Fedora Flatpaks that I'm interested in. The plan here is to keep fedmod around as long as we need it for Fedora Flatpaks and orphan / hand it over to someone else once we've ported all the code over to flatpak-module-tools. I've pushed all the changes to https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/kalev/rpms/fedmod/commits/rawhide and there's a koji scratch build available at https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=89463214
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== 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. [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [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 [-]: 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]: 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 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [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]: No %config files under /usr. [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 Python: [-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [?]: 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: [-]: 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]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [!]: 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. [?]: 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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- fedmod.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: fedmod-0.6.5.tar.gz Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- fedmod.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/_fedmod/__main__.py 644 /usr/bin/env python3 fedmod.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary fedmod fedmod.noarch: W: no-documentation Requires -------- fedmod (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 config(fedmod) python(abi) python3-PyYAML python3-aiohttp python3-attrs python3-click python3-click-completion python3-gobject-base python3-koji python3-libmodulemd1 python3-lxml python3-requests python3-requests-toolbelt python3-setuptools python3-smartcols python3-solv python3.11dist(aiohttp) python3.11dist(attrs) python3.11dist(click) python3.11dist(click-completion) python3.11dist(lxml) python3.11dist(pygobject) python3.11dist(pyyaml) python3.11dist(requests) python3.11dist(requests-toolbelt) Provides -------- fedmod: config(fedmod) fedmod python3.11dist(fedmod) python3dist(fedmod) Generated by fedora-review 0.8.0 (e988316) last change: 2022-04-07 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2106809 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: PHP, SugarActivity, Java, R, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, C/C++, fonts Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Kalev, if possible please the error from rpmlint (and the Source0 warning) before doing the first build.
Thanks, Tomas!
Releng ticket to unretire fedmod: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10887
I've noticed the following runtime deps are duplicated: python3-PyYAML python3.11dist(pyyaml) python3-aiohttp python3.11dist(aiohttp) python3-attrs python3.11dist(attrs) python3-click python3.11dist(click) python3-click-completion python3.11dist(click-completion) python3-gobject-base python3.11dist(pygobject) python3-lxml python3.11dist(lxml) python3-requests python3.11dist(requests) python3-requests-toolbelt python3.11dist(requests-toolbelt)
Oh nice, let me drop those requires from the spec file. Nice cleanup :)
OK, package unretired and fixes pushed to git and built in koji. I've also requested a new f36 branch. I also fixed the Source0 warning (so that we use the upstream tarball now, https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedmod/c/61829a7c4ef90304e6034ab2a989209960ddea04?branch=rawhide) and removed the duplicated python requires (https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fedmod/c/397176ae6bca64ebf3d7cb7ac9c146e8dca7bbb2?branch=rawhide). Thanks everybody! (Also, if anyone wants to co-maintain this, I'd appreciate it a lot.)