Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tcl8/tcl8.spec SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tcl8/tcl8-8.6.15-7.fc42.src.rpm Description: The Tcl (Tool Command Language) provides a powerful platform for creating integration applications that tie together diverse applications, protocols, devices, and frameworks. When paired with the Tk toolkit, Tcl provides a fastest and powerful way to create cross-platform GUI applications. Tcl can also be used for a variety of web-related tasks and for creating powerful command languages for applications. Fedora Account System Username: jskarvad For: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/TclTk9.0
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8344720 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2330615-tcl8/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08344720-tcl8/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - License file license.terms is not marked as %license Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text - Package has .a files: tcl8-devel. Does not provide -static: tcl8-devel. Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries 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.
Comparing the package with tcl fist. I am not entirely sure this needs an epoch set, but there is no harm in having it. Perhaps also drop this, and let it be obsoleted by the tcl 9 package? Obsoletes: tcl-tcldict <= %{vers} You might want to be more specific in %files, not to accidentally conflict. E.g. instead of %{_bindir}/tclsh* use %{_bindir}/tclsh8* The rest of the differences make sense. ============================================================ About the spec as-is: - Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: tcl8-devel. Does not provide -static: tcl8-devel. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries tcl8-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/libtclstub8.6.a tcl8-devel.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/lib64/libtclstub8.6.a I suggest dropping this entirely. --------- No need to number the Sources and Patches. --------- No need for %ldconfig_scriptlets.
license.terms should probably be %license, not %doc.
Thanks for the review. New version: Spec URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tcl8/tcl8.spec SRPM URL: https://jskarvad.fedorapeople.org/tcl8/tcl8-8.6.15-8.fc42.src.rpm Regarding the static stubs: https://fedorapeople.org/~tmz/guidelines/packaging-guidelines/Tcl/ I thought there is an exception for it. It cannot be easily disabled, only patched out which may break things and cause the compat not to be the drop-in replacement.
Created attachment 2061977 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8344720 to 8373815
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8373815 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2330615-tcl8/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08373815-tcl8/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - Package has .a files: tcl8-devel. Does not provide -static: tcl8-devel. Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries 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.
Package APPROVED.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tcl8