Bug 2297782 - Review Request: ocaml-swhid-core - Library for persistent identifiers used by Software Heritage
Summary: Review Request: ocaml-swhid-core - Library for persistent identifiers used by...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Richard W.M. Jones
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://ocamlpro.github.io/swhid_core/
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 2209797
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2024-07-15 02:39 UTC by Jerry James
Modified: 2024-07-16 01:53 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Fixed In Version: ocaml-swhid-core-0.1-1.fc41
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2024-07-16 01:53:33 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
rjones: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jerry James 2024-07-15 02:39:52 UTC
Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-swhid-core/ocaml-swhid-core.spec
SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-swhid-core/ocaml-swhid-core-0.1-1.fc41.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: jjames
Description: swhid_core is an OCaml library to work with persistent identifiers used by Software Heritage, also known as swhid.  This is the core library; for most use cases you should use the swhid library instead.

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2024-07-15 05:36:18 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7732634
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2297782-ocaml-swhid-core/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07732634-ocaml-swhid-core/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/

Please know that there can be false-positives.

---
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.

Comment 2 Richard W.M. Jones 2024-07-15 10:31:01 UTC
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++/

Not applicable here as it's an OCaml package and there are no C/C++
sources.

===== 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.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "ISC License", "*No copyright* ISC
     License [generated file]". 20 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /var/tmp/review/2297782-ocaml-swhid-
     core/licensecheck.txt

Checked upstream and it's intended to be ISC, although they are
unfortunately very lax on annotating individual source files with the
license.

[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.

Uses dune for build.

[-]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.

Uses autochangelog.

[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.

Generates debuginfo on every OCaml native arch.

[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 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 1235 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Ocaml:
[x]: This should never happen

===== 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[-]: Latest version is packaged.

There is no upstream released version.

[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]: 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-swhid-core-0.1-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          ocaml-swhid-core-devel-0.1-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
          ocaml-swhid-core-0.1-1.fc41.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/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/tmpkuqrpidm')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

ocaml-swhid-core-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/ocaml/swhid_core/swhid_core.a
ocaml-swhid-core-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings, 11 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.2 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: ocaml-swhid-core-debuginfo-0.1-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/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/tmpz7_winaz')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/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: 3

ocaml-swhid-core-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/ocaml/swhid_core/swhid_core.a
ocaml-swhid-core-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings, 13 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.2 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/OCamlPro/swhid_core/archive/0.1/swhid_core-0.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 8718b4eb97c9f0acd6d9162a9efa2f6af82474a0bd186f622fda3294f773bccf
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8718b4eb97c9f0acd6d9162a9efa2f6af82474a0bd186f622fda3294f773bccf


Requires
--------
ocaml-swhid-core (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics)
    ocaml(Stdlib)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Array)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Buffer)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Char)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Domain)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Either)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Format)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Int64)
    ocaml(Stdlib__List)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Seq)
    ocaml(Stdlib__String)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Uchar)
    ocaml(Swhid_core)
    ocaml(Swhid_core__Object)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

ocaml-swhid-core-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics)
    ocaml(Stdlib)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Array)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Buffer)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Char)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Domain)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Either)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Format)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Int64)
    ocaml(Stdlib__List)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Seq)
    ocaml(Stdlib__String)
    ocaml(Stdlib__Uchar)
    ocaml(Swhid_core)
    ocaml(Swhid_core__Object)
    ocaml-swhid-core(x86-64)
    ocamlx(CamlinternalFormat)
    ocamlx(Stdlib)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__Array)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__Buffer)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__Bytes)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__Char)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__Format)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__List)
    ocamlx(Stdlib__String)
    ocamlx(Swhid_core__Object)



Provides
--------
ocaml-swhid-core:
    ocaml(Swhid_core)
    ocaml(Swhid_core__Compute)
    ocaml(Swhid_core__Object)
    ocaml-swhid-core
    ocaml-swhid-core(x86-64)

ocaml-swhid-core-devel:
    ocaml(Swhid_core)
    ocaml(Swhid_core__Compute)
    ocaml(Swhid_core__Object)
    ocaml-swhid-core-devel
    ocaml-swhid-core-devel(x86-64)
    ocamlx(Swhid_core)
    ocamlx(Swhid_core__Compute)
    ocamlx(Swhid_core__Object)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2297782
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: C/C++, Shell-api, Ocaml, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, SugarActivity, R, fonts, Python, Haskell, Java, Perl
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comment 3 Richard W.M. Jones 2024-07-15 10:31:21 UTC
*** Approved by rjones ***

Comment 4 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2024-07-16 01:41:52 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ocaml-swhid-core

Comment 5 Jerry James 2024-07-16 01:53:33 UTC
Version 0.1 has been built in Rawhide.  Thank you for the review!


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.