Spec URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/python-pyvhacd.spec SRPM URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/python-pyvhacd-0.0.2-1.fc40.src.rpm Description: A very simple and raw Python binding for V-HACD (https://github.com/kmammou/v-hacd). Generate a set of convex hulls for a triangulated mesh. Fedora Account System Username: music Koji scratch builds: F40: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106951177 F39: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106951473 F38: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106951602 F37: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106951608 This is a new dependency for the upcoming 4.0.0 release of python-trimesh. It will be a neuro-sig package. As pybind11 wrappers for C++ header-only libraries go, this is a straightforward one.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package contains no static executables. [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: "MIT License", "Unknown or generated". 9 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-pyvhacd/2241628-python- pyvhacd/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [ ]: 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 [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. [ ]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 9175 bytes in 1 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. [x]: 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-pyvhacd [ ]: 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. [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]: 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: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-pyvhacd-0.0.2-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm python-pyvhacd-debugsource-0.0.2-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm python-pyvhacd-0.0.2-1.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/tmphkqcbb4n')] checks: 31, packages: 3 python-pyvhacd.src: W: strange-permission python-pyvhacd.spec 600 ==== 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 6.3 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: 2 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 1.7 s Unversioned so-files -------------------- python3-pyvhacd: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/pyVHACD.cpython-311-x86_64-linux-gnu.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/thomwolf/pyVHACD/archive/v0.02/pyVHACD-0.02.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : fd6e879b2fe309a385ddab01afc5bca151e78374ac6a003ccb3ef32cfad18ad0 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : fd6e879b2fe309a385ddab01afc5bca151e78374ac6a003ccb3ef32cfad18ad0 Requires -------- python3-pyvhacd (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.11)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.13)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.2)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) python(abi) python3.11dist(numpy) python3.11dist(pybind11) rtld(GNU_HASH) python-pyvhacd-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- python3-pyvhacd: python-pyvhacd python3-pyvhacd python3-pyvhacd(x86-64) python3.11-pyvhacd python3.11dist(pyvhacd) python3dist(pyvhacd) python-pyvhacd-debugsource: python-pyvhacd-debugsource python-pyvhacd-debugsource(x86-64) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/benson/Projects/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-pyvhacd/2241628-python-pyvhacd/srpm/python-pyvhacd.spec 2023-10-01 16:02:21.532336834 +0300 +++ /home/benson/Projects/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-pyvhacd/2241628-python-pyvhacd/srpm-unpacked/python-pyvhacd.spec 2023-10-01 03:00:00.000000000 +0300 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.3.5) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 1; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + Name: python-pyvhacd @@ -71,3 +81,4 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +* Sun Oct 01 2023 John Doe <packager> - 0.0.2-1 +- Uncommitted changes Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2241628 -m fedora-38-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-38-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, C/C++, Shell-api Disabled plugins: PHP, Java, Haskell, Perl, Ocaml, SugarActivity, Ruby, R, fonts Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) Seems good. Approved. b) Review of one of: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2218338 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2240805 would be appreciated if time and expertise allow.
Thank you for the review! It looks like a review is in progress for bug 2218338; bug 2240805 is blocked, but I would be happy to review it once the the package is buildable. Please feel free to CC me on other reviews you may have as they come up. You’ve done a few for me, and I’m happy to reciprocate.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyvhacd
Added to https://release-monitoring.org/project/291010/
FEDORA-2023-d40134e2ba has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-d40134e2ba
FEDORA-2023-43cf5d46b5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-43cf5d46b5
FEDORA-2023-a506a4fee2 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a506a4fee2
FEDORA-2023-c545de8e5a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c545de8e5a
FEDORA-2023-d40134e2ba has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-43cf5d46b5 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-2023-43cf5d46b5 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-43cf5d46b5 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-a506a4fee2 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-a506a4fee2 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a506a4fee2 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-c545de8e5a 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-c545de8e5a \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c545de8e5a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-c545de8e5a has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-a506a4fee2 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-43cf5d46b5 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.