Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/xnvme/xnvme.spec SRPM URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/xnvme/xnvme-0.7.4-1.fc39.src.rpm Description: Unified API and tools for traditional and emerging I/O interfaces Fedora Account System Username: rjones
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7000858 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2263333-xnvme/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07000858-xnvme/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113165356 Note that it fails to build on i686, and looking at the build logs it seems as if it has multiple issues with incorrect 64 bit assumptions.
License text is not installed. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text Packaging static libraries is discouraged. Should you want to keep it, the -static package should require the -devel package, as otherwise the library headers won't be installed. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries > %{_mandir}/man1/%{name}.1.gz Do not assume man pages will be gzipped. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_manpages
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/xnvme/xnvme.spec SRPM URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/xnvme/xnvme-0.7.4-2.fc39.src.rpm Description: Unified API and tools for traditional and emerging I/O interfaces Fedora Account System Username: rjones karlowich http://git.annexia.org/?p=fedora-reviews.git;a=commitdiff;h=50d1f75a8afe7185c32a5dcc9bb99880d3c3b656 * Install license text. * Make -static depend on -devel. * Tighten up man page %file patterns. * Exclude i686.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7034310 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2263333-xnvme/srpm-builds/07034310/builder-live.log.gz Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide. - If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113739090
Can you reupload the SRPM, please? The link gives me HTTP 404.
It's working for me, can you try again or use 'wget'?
Nope. The SRPM link doesn't work for me, be it through the browser, wget, or curl. The spec link works fine.
Spec URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/xnvme/xnvme.spec SRPM URL: http://oirase.annexia.org/reviews/xnvme/xnvme-0.7.4-2.fc41.src.rpm Description: Unified API and tools for traditional and emerging I/O interfaces Fedora Account System Username: rjones karlowich http://git.annexia.org/?p=fedora-reviews.git;a=commitdiff;h=50d1f75a8afe7185c32a5dcc9bb99880d3c3b656 * Install license text. * Make -static depend on -devel. * Tighten up man page %file patterns. * Exclude i686. -- Let's try this one again. I had it mind that the spec file link was broken. In fact it's the SRPM link that was broken, because I used the wrong filename. These links should now work.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7131939 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2263333-xnvme/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07131939-xnvme/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
Would be great if you could look into running the tests in %check. Other than that, looks good to me. Package approved. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [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]: Package contains no static executables. [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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [-]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [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. [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 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]: Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: xnvme-static. [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 ===== 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [?]: 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. Note: Successfully builds in koji. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=115084937 [!]: %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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [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: xnvme-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm xnvme-devel-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm xnvme-static-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm xnvme-tools-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm xnvme-debuginfo-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm xnvme-debugsource-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm xnvme-0.7.4-2.fc41.src.rpm ============== rpmlint session starts ============= rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmp1h_9m_yn')] checks: 32, packages: 7 xnvme-static.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/libxnvme.a xnvme.src: E: spelling-error ('psync', '%description -l en_US psync -> sync, p sync') xnvme.src: E: spelling-error ('libaio', '%description -l en_US libaio -> libation') xnvme.src: E: spelling-error ('uring', '%description -l en_US uring -> ruing, ring, luring') xnvme.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('psync', '%description -l en_US psync -> sync, p sync') xnvme.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('libaio', '%description -l en_US libaio -> libation') xnvme.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('uring', '%description -l en_US uring -> ruing, ring, luring') xnvme-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xnvme-driver xnvme.x86_64: W: no-documentation xnvme-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation xnvme-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation ================ 7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 7 errors, 4 warnings, 42 filtered, 7 badness; has taken 2.1 s ================ Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: xnvme-debuginfo-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm xnvme-tools-debuginfo-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.rpm =================== rpmlint session starts ================== rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmp6r2_lubt')] checks: 32, packages: 2 ====== 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 26 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.7 s ====== Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/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: 32, packages: 7 xnvme-static.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/libxnvme.a xnvme.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('psync', '%description -l en_US psync -> sync, p sync') xnvme.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('libaio', '%description -l en_US libaio -> libation') xnvme.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('uring', '%description -l en_US uring -> ruing, ring, luring') xnvme-tools.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary xnvme-driver xnvme-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation xnvme.x86_64: W: no-documentation xnvme-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 7 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 4 warnings, 60 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 3.2 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/OpenMPDK/xNVMe/releases/download/v0.7.4/xnvme-0.7.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6d42d0bd7e6b395a37869a8713d138d332500f20ecc272ebf6789471026a7191 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6d42d0bd7e6b395a37869a8713d138d332500f20ecc272ebf6789471026a7191 Requires -------- xnvme (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libaio.so.1()(64bit) libaio.so.1(LIBAIO_0.1)(64bit) libaio.so.1(LIBAIO_0.4)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) liburing.so.2()(64bit) liburing.so.2(LIBURING_2.0)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) xnvme-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config libxnvme.so.0()(64bit) pkgconfig(liburing) xnvme(x86-64) xnvme-static (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): xnvme-devel(x86-64) xnvme-tools (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/bash libaio.so.1()(64bit) libaio.so.1(LIBAIO_0.1)(64bit) libaio.so.1(LIBAIO_0.4)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) liburing.so.2()(64bit) liburing.so.2(LIBURING_2.0)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) xnvme(x86-64) xnvme-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): xnvme-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- xnvme: libxnvme.so.0()(64bit) xnvme xnvme(x86-64) xnvme-devel: pkgconfig(xnvme) xnvme-devel xnvme-devel(x86-64) xnvme-static: xnvme-static xnvme-static(x86-64) xnvme-tools: xnvme-tools xnvme-tools(x86-64) xnvme-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) libxnvme.so.0.7.4-0.7.4-2.fc41.x86_64.debug()(64bit) xnvme-debuginfo xnvme-debuginfo(x86-64) xnvme-debugsource: xnvme-debugsource xnvme-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2263333 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Perl, R, Java, Haskell, SugarActivity, Ocaml, fonts, Python, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
I have added a %check section, but it currently does nothing: + /usr/bin/meson test -C redhat-linux-build --num-processes 12 --print-errorlogs No tests defined. The lack of documentation is also a problem. I will raise both issues upstream. Thanks for the review!
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xnvme
https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/60978 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/60979
FEDORA-2024-4af8bcdf3e (xnvme-0.7.4-2.fc40) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4af8bcdf3e
FEDORA-2024-4af8bcdf3e has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-4af8bcdf3e \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4af8bcdf3e See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2024-4af8bcdf3e (xnvme-0.7.4-2.fc40) has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Upstream tracker for issues raised by this review: https://github.com/OpenMPDK/xNVMe/issues/446