Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/perl-Alien-OpenSSL.spec SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: This distribution provides OpenSSL so that it can be used by other Perl distributions that are on CPAN. It does this by first trying to detect an existing install of OpenSSL on your system. If found it will use that. If it cannot be found, the source code will be downloaded from the internet and it will be installed in a private share location for the use of other modules. Fedora Account System Username: orion
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7988763 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2310345-perl-alien-openssl/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07988763-perl-Alien-OpenSSL/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.
Swap you for a review of perl-EV-Glib? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2310184
Done
- For CPAN-based packages the URL tag should use a non-versioned metacpan.org URL, i.e., https://metacpan.org/dist/Alien-Build - Can the build environment be shrunk with BuildRequires: perl-interpreter rather than perl? - The contents of LICENSE is incorrect. See https://github.com/uperl/File-XDG/issues/28 for a similar occurrence, likely with the same cause. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [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", "GNU General Public License, Version 1 and/or The Perl 5 License". 24 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/perl-Alien- OpenSSL/licensecheck.txt [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. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: 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. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [-]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [-]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: 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 13349 bytes in 6 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: No rpmlint messages. [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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Perl: [x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires and Requires:. [x]: CPAN urls should be non-versioned. ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [!]: 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. [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. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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: [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: perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.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/tmp_tfs5mvj')] checks: 32, packages: 2 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: there is no installed rpm "perl-Alien-OpenSSL". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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: 1 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/P/PL/PLICEASE/Alien-OpenSSL-0.15.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6b02b8ee374855f9f3c2058be0d696077d49d24b8794abd13d213b9d630a4b83 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6b02b8ee374855f9f3c2058be0d696077d49d24b8794abd13d213b9d630a4b83 Requires -------- perl-Alien-OpenSSL (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): perl(Alien::Base) perl(base) perl(strict) perl(warnings) pkgconfig(openssl) Provides -------- perl-Alien-OpenSSL: perl-Alien-OpenSSL perl-Alien-OpenSSL(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name perl-Alien-OpenSSL --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Perl, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, PHP, R, Haskell, SugarActivity, C/C++, Ocaml, Python, fonts Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
URL and Source0 FIX: Please switch URL and Source0 from search.cpan.org/cpan.org to metacpan.org BuildRequires FIX: Please add build-require coreutils - needed for macro %{_fixperms} perl(Config) - t/00_diag.t:2 perl-interpreter - perl-Alien-OpenSSL.spec:42 perl-generators - it will automatically generates run-time Requires and Provides for installed Perl files More info about BR https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/#_build_dependencies FIX: Use 'perl(:VERSION) >= 5.6' instead of 'perl >= 0:5.006' because the package has an epoch. 'perl' is meta-package and it install all core modules and they are not needed for the build. FIX: Remove perl(Sort::Versions) it is not used in the code. TODO: Add "NO_PACKLIST=1 NO_PERLLOCAL=1" to 'perl Makefile.PL' If you use option NO_PACKLIST=1, please add version constrain to ExtUtils::MakeMaker >= 6.76 then you can remove deleting by find command FIX: Please remove files alienfile, author.yml, dist.ini, META.json they do not needed to be in package $ rpm -qp --requires perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm | sort | uniq -c | grep -v rpmlib 1 perl(Alien::Base) 1 perl(Alien::Base) >= 0.038 1 perl(Alien::OpenSSL) 2 perl(base) 1 perl-libs 2 perl(strict) 2 perl(warnings) 1 pkgconfig(openssl) = 3.2.2 FIX: Do not list run-requires, they will be generates by perl-generators $ rpm -qp --provides perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Alien::OpenSSL) = 0.15 1 perl-Alien-OpenSSL = 0.15-1.fc42 1 perl(Alien::OpenSSL::Install::Files) 1 perl-Alien-OpenSSL(x86-64) = 0.15-1.fc42 Binary provides are Ok.
(In reply to Jitka Plesnikova from comment #5) > URL and Source0 > FIX: Please switch URL and Source0 from search.cpan.org/cpan.org to > metacpan.org Done > BuildRequires > FIX: Please add build-require > coreutils - needed for macro %{_fixperms} Added > perl(Config) - t/00_diag.t:2 > perl-interpreter - perl-Alien-OpenSSL.spec:42 Aren't these brought in by "perl"? > perl-generators - it will automatically generates run-time Requires and > Provides for installed Perl files Added > More info about BR > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/ > #_build_dependencies > FIX: Use 'perl(:VERSION) >= 5.6' instead of 'perl >= 0:5.006' because > the package has an epoch. 'perl' is meta-package and it install all > core modules and they are not needed for the build. Done > FIX: Remove perl(Sort::Versions) it is not used in the code. > Done > TODO: Add "NO_PACKLIST=1 NO_PERLLOCAL=1" to 'perl Makefile.PL' > If you use option NO_PACKLIST=1, please add version constrain > to ExtUtils::MakeMaker >= 6.76 > then you can remove deleting by find command Done > > FIX: Please remove files alienfile, author.yml, dist.ini, META.json they do > not needed to be in package > > $ rpm -qp --requires perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm | sort | uniq > -c | grep -v rpmlib > 1 perl(Alien::Base) > 1 perl(Alien::Base) >= 0.038 > 1 perl(Alien::OpenSSL) > 2 perl(base) > 1 perl-libs > 2 perl(strict) > 2 perl(warnings) > 1 pkgconfig(openssl) = 3.2.2 > FIX: Do not list run-requires, they will be generates by perl-generators Done Sorry for the out of date perl package - it's been a while since I've made one from scratch and it seems that cpanspec is no longer up to date. Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/perl-Alien-OpenSSL.spec SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.src.rpm
Created attachment 2047139 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 7988763 to 8025892
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8025892 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2310345-perl-alien-openssl/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08025892-perl-Alien-OpenSSL/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.
> > BuildRequires > > FIX: Please add build-require > > perl(Config) - t/00_diag.t:2 > > perl-interpreter - perl-Alien-OpenSSL.spec:42 > > Aren't these brought in by "perl"? You are right, but it brings all Perl Core packages which are not usually needed. BTW, it is recommended to include explicit dependencies for core modules, because they can move between sub-packages or disappear from core Perl. 'perl(:VERSION)' is provided by perl-libs which contains shared library. FIX: you still need add perl-interpreter or perl. > Sorry for the out of date perl package - it's been a while since I've made > one from scratch and it seems that cpanspec is no longer up to date. The upstream of cpanspec is inactive for a long time. You can check Fedora Perl Packaging guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/
Spec URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/perl-Alien-OpenSSL.spec SRPM URL: https://orion.fedorapeople.org/perl-Alien-OpenSSL-0.15-1.fc42.src.rpm Added BR perl-interpreter
Created attachment 2047532 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8025892 to 8033817
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8033817 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2310345-perl-alien-openssl/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08033817-perl-Alien-OpenSSL/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.
I remain concerned that the contents of packaged file LICENSE is incorrect. Please raise this upstream.
Okay, I've filed https://github.com/uperl/File-XDG/issues/28. I don't see any activity in that repo for a while so I'm not hopeful for a quick resolution. Would it be okay if I just change the license tag to Artistic-1.0 for now?
(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #14) > Would it be okay if I just change the license tag to Artistic-1.0 for now? I think there are a couple of problems with that: - The licence is probably intended to be Artistic-1.0-Perl. - Licence "GPL-1.0-or-later OR Artistic-1.0" would need adding to license-validate, since it's not currently known to it as a valid licence (https://pagure.io/copr/license-validate/).
Perhaps Fedora legal can shed some light or make a suggestion.
A VERY long time ago, it was determined that Artistic 1.0 was an unsuitable license for Fedora and we removed all packages that used only that license. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Artistic1Removal