Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-uucd/ocaml-uucd.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-uucd/ocaml-uucd-15.0.0-1.fc39.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: Uucd is an OCaml module to decode the data of the Unicode character database (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr44/) from its XML representation (http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr42/). It provides high-level (but not necessarily efficient) access to the data so that efficient representations can be extracted. Uucd is made of a single module, depends on Xmlm and is distributed under the ISC license.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/ ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [-]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [-]: Package contains no static executables. Question not really applicable to OCaml packages. [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. [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", "ISC License", "*No copyright* ISC License", "*No copyright* Public domain". 9 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/tmp/2217074-ocaml- uucd/licensecheck.txt License looks correct, and I believe "ISC" is a correct SPDX name too: https://spdx.org/licenses/ISC [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. Yes since -devel subpackage depends on main package. [-]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. Using a weird build system, so probably not, but it's a tiny OCaml package so this doesn't matter in practice. [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 [-]: 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 2 files. We're not building significant docs. [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]: 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 Ocaml: [x]: This should never happen ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. Yes there is already a LICENSE.md file & it is packaged. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. Latest is 15.0.0 at time of writing. [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. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %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]: 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: [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: ocaml-uucd-15.0.0-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm ocaml-uucd-devel-15.0.0-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm ocaml-uucd-debuginfo-15.0.0-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm ocaml-uucd-debugsource-15.0.0-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm ocaml-uucd-15.0.0-1.fc38.src.rpm ============================ 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp3xyu1hns')] checks: 31, packages: 5 ocaml-uucd-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/ocaml/uucd/uucd.a ocaml-uucd.x86_64: E: shared-library-without-dependency-information /usr/lib64/ocaml/uucd/uucd.cmxs RWMJ: These are used internally by the OCaml compiler. ocaml-uucd-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation RWMJ: I don't think this matters as documentation is available in the *.mli file. 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings, 2 badness; has taken 0.1 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: ocaml-uucd-debuginfo-15.0.0-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm ============================ 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpyfg9s2yx')] checks: 31, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ 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: 4 ocaml-uucd-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/ocaml/uucd/uucd.a ocaml-uucd.x86_64: E: shared-library-without-dependency-information /usr/lib64/ocaml/uucd/uucd.cmxs ocaml-uucd-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings, 2 badness; has taken 0.2 s Source checksums ---------------- https://erratique.ch/software/uucd/releases/uucd-15.0.0.tbz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0e4b038ba0df7bf7cd18199eb9bc31bfd7527131cf251b9a3eb957eccf1046bc CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0e4b038ba0df7bf7cd18199eb9bc31bfd7527131cf251b9a3eb957eccf1046bc Requires -------- ocaml-uucd (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics) ocaml(Stdlib) ocaml(Stdlib__Buffer) ocaml(Stdlib__Char) ocaml(Stdlib__Either) ocaml(Stdlib__Format) ocaml(Stdlib__Hashtbl) ocaml(Stdlib__Int64) ocaml(Stdlib__List) ocaml(Stdlib__Map) ocaml(Stdlib__Printf) ocaml(Stdlib__Seq) ocaml(Stdlib__String) ocaml(Stdlib__Uchar) ocaml(Xmlm) rtld(GNU_HASH) ocaml-uucd-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics) ocaml(Stdlib) ocaml(Stdlib__Buffer) ocaml(Stdlib__Char) ocaml(Stdlib__Either) ocaml(Stdlib__Format) ocaml(Stdlib__Hashtbl) ocaml(Stdlib__Int64) ocaml(Stdlib__List) ocaml(Stdlib__Map) ocaml(Stdlib__Printf) ocaml(Stdlib__Seq) ocaml(Stdlib__String) ocaml(Stdlib__Uchar) ocaml(Xmlm) ocaml-uucd(x86-64) ocaml-xmlm-devel(x86-64) ocamlx(Stdlib) ocamlx(Stdlib__Hashtbl) ocamlx(Stdlib__Int64) ocamlx(Stdlib__List) ocamlx(Stdlib__Map) ocamlx(Stdlib__Printf) ocamlx(Stdlib__String) ocamlx(Xmlm) ocaml-uucd-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ocaml-uucd-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- ocaml-uucd: ocaml(Uucd) ocaml-uucd ocaml-uucd(x86-64) ocaml-uucd-devel: ocaml(Uucd) ocaml-uucd-devel ocaml-uucd-devel(x86-64) ocamlx(Uucd) ocaml-uucd-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) ocaml-uucd-debuginfo ocaml-uucd-debuginfo(x86-64) ocaml-uucd-debugsource: ocaml-uucd-debugsource ocaml-uucd-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2217074 -m fedora-38-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-38-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api, Ocaml Disabled plugins: fonts, Perl, Haskell, Java, PHP, SugarActivity, Python, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
*** This package is approved for Fedora ***
Note: Usually any source code derived from Unicode data is covered by the Unicode License Agreement (https://spdx.org/licenses/Unicode-DFS-2016.html). I'm not sure if the data included in this package is "affected" by this, but it would be good to check.
This is the guts of the library: https://github.com/dbuenzli/uucd/blob/master/src/uucd.ml I'm not sure that this kind of data dump is copyrightable at all, at least not in the US. Upstream is silent on how the data was generated.
Don't ask me, as the Unicode Consortium :) But since upstream doesn't say how this code came to be ... I'd say it's safe to assume that the project's license (ISC) applies to everything.
This code is a reader for the Unicode character database. If you pass the filename of an XML Unicode character database, such as those found in https://www.unicode.org/Public/15.0.0/ucdxml/, to the "decode" function, it produces an OCaml representation of that database. It does not contain the actual Unicode character database, so I think we are okay licensewise. Thank you for the review @rjones . I plan to wait to build this until we create the OCaml 5.0.0 side tag.
Oh, heck, I forgot that using '@' to refer to a person turns on the needinfo flag. I don't need any info! Let's just clear that.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ocaml-uucd
If we're going to use my scripts to do the real OCaml 5 build (ie. the one in the side tag) then it'd help to have these new packages already in dist-git. Doing a build isn't necessary though.
The package has been built in Rawhide.