Bug 2310612 - Review Request: gr-satellites - add gnuradio based satellite decoder to fedora
Summary: Review Request: gr-satellites - add gnuradio based satellite decoder to fedora
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://gr-satellites.readthedocs.io
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2024-09-07 13:08 UTC by Martin Hübner
Modified: 2025-11-30 12:06 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 1 Martin Hübner 2024-09-07 13:18:34 UTC
Hello there,

this is my first contribution to the fedora project. According to this guide:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/New_Package_Process_for_New_Contributors/#create_your_review_request

I apparently need a sponsor (not sure, what that means exactly though).

The mentioned specfile builds on copr for all fedora versions and architectures I tested for:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mhuebner/gr-satellites/build/7991272/

I would love to have gr-satellites added to fedora. This would facilitate the installation tremendously, as it is currently only available from source.

Bests,
mhuebner

Comment 3 Bruno Thomsen 2025-07-21 19:13:40 UTC
Mock review

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Missing empty line between Summary and Requires in %package devel
- Packaged version is 5.7.0 so remove "repair wrong line endings, merged upstream already. Will be obsolete with versions after 5.6.0" workaround.
- Don't wildcard install shared libraries as that hides bumps in SONAME.
  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_listing_shared_library_files
- License looks okay, SPDX file tag list GPL-3.0-or-later 433 times and GPL-3.0 9 times.
- Package does not own all used directories
  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/UnownedDirectories/

===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[ ]: 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.

Generic:
[ ]: 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 v3.0 or
     later [generated file]", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License,
     Version 3", "GNU General Public License, Version 3", "Apache License
     2.0 and/or GNU General Public License, Version 3 and/or GNU Lesser
     General Public License, Version 2.1 and/or MIT License", "GNU General
     Public License v3.0 or later", "MIT License", "GNU Lesser General
     Public License", "Apache License 2.0", "GNU General Public License,
     Version 3 and/or MIT License", "GNU General Public License, Version 3
     [generated file]", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1",
     "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* GNU General
     Public License v2.0 or later". 698 files have unknown license.
     Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/gr-
     satellites/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/include/satellites,
     /usr/lib64/cmake/satellites, /usr/lib64/python3.13/site-
     packages/satellites
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/python3.13/site-
     packages, /usr/lib64/cmake/satellites, /usr/include/satellites,
     /usr/lib64/python3.13/site-packages/satellites, /usr/lib64/python3.13
[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: 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 11694 bytes in 2 files.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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]: 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.
[ ]: 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:
[!]: 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.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: 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]: 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: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: gr-satellites-5.7.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          gr-satellites-devel-5.7.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
          gr-satellites-5.7.0-1.fc42.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.6.1
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
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmph0dbso5r')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

gr-satellites.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libgnuradio-satellites.so
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 143 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 1.6 s 




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: gr-satellites-debuginfo-5.7.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.6.1
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
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpd0ej59k8')]
checks: 32, packages: 1

 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s 





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "gr-satellites-devel".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "gr-satellites-debuginfo".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "gr-satellites".
There are no files to process nor additional arguments.
Nothing to do, aborting.
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.7.0
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: 3

 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Unversioned so-files
--------------------
gr-satellites: /usr/lib64/libgnuradio-satellites.so
gr-satellites: /usr/lib64/python3.13/site-packages/satellites/satellites_python.cpython-313-x86_64-linux-gnu.so

Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/daniestevez/gr-satellites/archive/refs/tags/v5.7.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 6f186e4ea959c212b9df255de2b6d2db3ed0c68453c6792c74886ed0ad9b5ce4
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6f186e4ea959c212b9df255de2b6d2db3ed0c68453c6792c74886ed0ad9b5ce4


Requires
--------
gr-satellites (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    cmake-filesystem(x86-64)
    gnuradio
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libfmt.so.11()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libgnuradio-blocks.so.3.10.11()(64bit)
    libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.10.11()(64bit)
    libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.10.11()(64bit)
    libgnuradio-satellites.so.5.7.0()(64bit)
    libm.so.6()(64bit)
    libspdlog.so.1.15()(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_1.3.15)(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_1.3.9)(64bit)
    libvolk.so.3.1()(64bit)
    python(abi)
    python3-construct
    python3-requests
    python3-websocket-client
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

gr-satellites-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    cmake-filesystem(x86-64)
    gnuradio-devel
    gr-satellites(x86-64)
    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)
    libgnuradio-blocks.so.3.10.11()(64bit)
    libgnuradio-pmt.so.3.10.11()(64bit)
    libgnuradio-runtime.so.3.10.11()(64bit)
    libgnuradio-satellites.so.5.7.0()(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_1.3.15)(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_1.3.9)(64bit)
    python(abi)
    python3-construct
    python3-requests
    python3-websocket-client
    rtld(GNU_HASH)



Provides
--------
gr-satellites:
    cmake(gnuradio-satellites)
    cmake(satellites)
    gr-satellites
    gr-satellites(x86-64)
    libgnuradio-satellites.so.5.7.0()(64bit)

gr-satellites-devel:
    cmake(gnuradio-satellites)
    cmake(satellites)
    gr-satellites-devel
    gr-satellites-devel(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 gr-satellites --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-42-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic, Python
Disabled plugins: Haskell, PHP, Ocaml, Java, R, Perl, SugarActivity, fonts
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comment 4 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-20 15:30:39 UTC
Hello,
I do realize that this is possibly an old ticket. I am sorry that it hasn't been
reviewed yet. Let me trigger the Fedora Review Service to see if the package
builds successfully. Hopefully, a green check mark will attract some reviewer.

If I am resurrecting an old ticket that you are not interested in anymore, my
apologies, feel free to close it.

[fedora-review-service-build]

Comment 5 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-20 15:30:44 UTC
There seems to be some problem with the following file.
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mhuebner/gr-satellites/fedora-42-x86_64/08747957-gr-satellites/gr-satellites-5.7.0-1.fc42.src.rpm
Fetching it results in a 404 Not Found error.
Please make sure the URL is correct and publicly available.


---
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 7 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-30 12:06:26 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9851736
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2310612-gr-satellites/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09851736-gr-satellites/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.


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