Spec URL: https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/sexp.git/plain/sexp.spec?id=35dda533579c08f066d03b26f5b7643b3a5e63c0 SRPM URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/SRPMS/sexp-0.8.5-1.remi.src.rpm Description: S-expressions parser and generator tools. Fedora Account System Username: remi ---- This library is for now bundled in rnp (used by thunderbird for GPG features) Support for build as shared is new (and still uncompleted, so requires "soversion" patch)
Scratch build https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=102422724
And rnp is ready to use this: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rnp/c/e1f2beb8136748a9d8d8dbec44c95ef08d4124c2?branch=rawhide
Updated to 0.8.6 https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/sexp.git/commit/?id=427bda879b0b91d60da550e995482166cf021b21 Spec URL: https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/sexp.git/plain/sexp.spec?id=427bda879b0b91d60da550e995482166cf021b21 SRPM URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/SRPMS/sexp-0.8.6-1.remi.src.rpm
Probably have to wait on https://github.com/rnpgp/sexp/issues/45 name conflict libsexp (rnpgp/sexp and mjsottile/sfsexp)
Project was renamed from sexp to sexpp, solving the name conflict, so ready for review https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/sexp.git/commit/?id=ea373ce9bb624a069ba173d5cd94008ea54cf8e6 Spec URL: https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/sexp.git/plain/sexpp.spec?id=ea373ce9bb624a069ba173d5cd94008ea54cf8e6 SRPM URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/SRPMS/sexpp-0.8.7-1.remi.src.rpm
URL and Source0 addresses are Ok. Source0 archive (SHA-512: 28b93626887da3c1228ddbb9b8566f2d9895f263a1fc31ac2cfa6fc0215cb6a8ec31900255335792bfd580d10f53dd3f88274df83f8c0ddff62ebe35dce7da08) is original. Ok. Summary verified from README.adoc. Ok. Description verified from README.adoc. Ok. License verified from tests/src/primitives-tests.cpp, tests/src/g23-exception-tests.cpp, tests/src/g23-compat-tests.cpp, tests/src/g10-compat-tests.cpp, tests/src/exception-tests.cpp, tests/src/compare-files.cpp, tests/src/baseline-tests.cpp, tests/scripts/tests.sh, tests/include/sexp-tests, src/sexp-simple-string.cpp, src/sexp-output.cpp, src/sexp-object.cpp, src/sexp-main.cpp, src/sexp-input.cpp, src/sexp-error.cpp, src/sexp-depth-manager.cpp, src/sexp-char-defs.cpp, src/ext-key-format.cpp, include/sexpp/sexp.h, include/sexpp/sexp-public.h, include/sexpp/sexp-error.h, include/sexpp/ext-key-format.h, flake.nix, default.nix, codecov.yml, cmake/version.cmake, cmake/sexp-samples-folder.h.in, README.adoc, LICENSE.md, CMakeLists.txt, .github/workflows/nix.yml, .github/workflows/lint.yml, .github/workflows/coverity.yml, .github/workflows/coverage.yml, .github/workflows/codeql.yml, .github/workflows/build-and-test.yml, .github/workflows/build-and-test-rh.yml, .github/workflows/build-and-test-msys.yml, .github/workflows/build-and-test-deb.yml. TODO: Build-require 'coreutils' under licensecheck condition (sexpp.spec:70). TODO: Build-require 'grep' under licensecheck condition (sexpp.spec:73). TODO: Build-require 'sed' under licensecheck condition (sexpp.spec:73). TODO: Pass an explicit -DWITH_SEXP_TESTS=ON/OFF option to %cmake based on 'tests' macro. There is no need to build tests if you are not going to run them. TODO: Pass explicit -DWITH_SEXP_CLI=ON -DWITH_SANITIZERS=OFF -DWITH_COVERAGE=OFF options to %cmake. That will prevent from an unnoticed change in upstream defaults. All tests pass. Ok. $ rpmlint sexpp.spec ../SRPMS/sexpp-0.8.7-1.fc39.src.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/sexpp-* ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-* ======================================== rpmlint session starts ======================================= rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 8 sexpp.spec:75: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 10, tab: line 75) sexpp.spec:75: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 10, tab: line 75) ========= 7 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.5 s ======== TODO: Normalize whitespace in the spec file. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/sexpp-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 25584 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/bin/sexpp drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/85 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/85/6042f9ca57991a892f7fbba68986672cfc3ddc -> ../../../../usr/bin/sexpp -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 813 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/share/man/man1/sexpp.1.gz $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/1b lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 39 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/1b/99df56177ea18d3307a7bfcddee0ea992bdb04 -> ../../../../usr/lib64/libsexpp.so.0.8.7 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib64/libsexpp.so.0 -> libsexpp.so.0.8.7 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 71080 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib64/libsexpp.so.0.8.7 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/share/licenses/libsexpp -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1368 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/share/licenses/libsexpp/LICENSE.md $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-devel-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/include/sexpp -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3270 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/include/sexpp/ext-key-format.h -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2909 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/include/sexpp/sexp-error.h -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1287 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/include/sexpp/sexp-public.h -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17593 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/include/sexpp/sexp.h lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib64/libsexpp.so -> libsexpp.so.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 210 Jun 26 02:00 /usr/lib64/pkgconfig/sexpp.pc File layout and permission are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/sexpp-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 glibc >= 2.37.9000-14 1 libc.so.6()(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.32)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.38)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) 1 libsexpp(x86-64) = 0.8.7-1.fc39 1 libsexpp.so.0()(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.11)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.32)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 1 rtld(GNU_HASH) $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 glibc >= 2.37.9000-14 1 libc.so.6()(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.32)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.38)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.11)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.30)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.32)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 1 rtld(GNU_HASH) $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-devel-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 /usr/bin/pkg-config 1 libsexpp(x86-64) = 0.8.7-1.fc39 1 libsexpp.so.0()(64bit) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/sexpp-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 sexpp = 0.8.7-1.fc39 1 sexpp(x86-64) = 0.8.7-1.fc39 $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libsexpp = 0.8.7-1.fc39 1 libsexpp(x86-64) = 0.8.7-1.fc39 1 libsexpp.so.0()(64bit) $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-devel-0.8.7-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libsexpp-devel = 0.8.7-1.fc39 1 libsexpp-devel(x86-64) = 0.8.7-1.fc39 1 pkgconfig(sexpp) = 0.8.7 Binary provides are Ok. $ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/x86_64/sexpp-* ../RPMS/x86_64/libsexpp-* Binary dependencies are resolvable. Ok. The package builds in Fedora 39 (https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=102780001). Ok. The package is in line with Fedora and CMake packaging guidelines. Please consider fixing the TODO items before building this package. Resolution: Package APPROVED.
Damned, I miss the review > $ fedpkg request-repo -m no-monitoring -u https://github.com/rnpgp/sexpp -s 'S-expressions parser and generator tools' sexpp 2216484 > Could not execute request_repo: The Bugzilla bug's review was approved over 60 days ago Petr, can you please approve it again?
No problem.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/sexpp
Great thanks for the review TODO fixed Spaces: https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/sexp.git/commit/?id=bff393b7c33c036a8724895589b1cfecd71ca84a Cmake: https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/lib/sexp.git/commit/?id=5a249783c2fb046a50621fdcfda416e365b5b025 SCM requests: https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/56074 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/56075 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/56076 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/56077 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/56078 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/56079
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-39eb83c478 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-39eb83c478
FEDORA-2023-63c8871304 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-63c8871304
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8166e85e2c has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8166e85e2c
FEDORA-2023-a2c4b376f7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a2c4b376f7
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8166e85e2c 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-2023-8166e85e2c See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-63c8871304 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-63c8871304 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-63c8871304 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-a2c4b376f7 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-a2c4b376f7 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a2c4b376f7 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-b7384c7d52 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-b7384c7d52 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-b7384c7d52 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-39eb83c478 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-2023-39eb83c478 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-8166e85e2c has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-b7384c7d52 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-63c8871304 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-39eb83c478 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-a2c4b376f7 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.