Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mavit/tree-sitter/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08722780-tree-sitter-php/tree-sitter-php.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/mavit/tree-sitter/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08722780-tree-sitter-php/tree-sitter-php-0.23.12-1.fc43.src.rpm Description: PHP grammar for Tree-sitter Fedora Account System Username: mavit
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8722847 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2349769-tree-sitter-php/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08722847-tree-sitter-php/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.
I get an HTTP 404 trying to download the src.rpm.
Spec URL: https://mavit.fedorapeople.org/rpm/tree-sitter-php.spec SRPM URL: https://mavit.fedorapeople.org/rpm/tree-sitter-php-0.23.12-1.fc43.src.rpm
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9153845 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2349769-tree-sitter-php/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09153845-tree-sitter-php/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.
I will take this review.
The spec file URL and the spec file in the SRPM differ slightly. They have different versions on the tree-sitter-srpm-macros BuildRequires. I trust you will get that sorted out before importing. This package is APPROVED. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License". 91 files have unknown license. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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 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]: 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 995 bytes in 1 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. [x]: %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: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) [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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: libtree-sitter-php-0.23.12-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm libtree-sitter-php-devel-0.23.12-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm tree-sitter-php-0.23.12-1.fc43.src.rpm ============================ 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpxya1ztc7')] checks: 32, packages: 3 libtree-sitter-php.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libtree-sitter 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings, 27 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.2 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ 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: 2 libtree-sitter-php.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libtree-sitter 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings, 24 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/tree-sitter/tree-sitter-php/archive/v0.23.12/tree-sitter-php-0.23.12.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 5c94b16bf1c6c4ed5bd9cc1ba27f0d2e69871f978ad7160c0e64291e2fa0169e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5c94b16bf1c6c4ed5bd9cc1ba27f0d2e69871f978ad7160c0e64291e2fa0169e Requires -------- libtree-sitter-php (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libtree-sitter rtld(GNU_HASH) libtree-sitter-php-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config libtree-sitter-devel libtree-sitter-php(x86-64) libtree-sitter-php.so.14.0()(64bit) libtree-sitter-php_only.so.14.0()(64bit) Provides -------- libtree-sitter-php: libtree-sitter-php libtree-sitter-php(x86-64) libtree-sitter-php.so.14.0()(64bit) libtree-sitter-php_only.so.14.0()(64bit) tree-sitter(php) tree-sitter(php_only) libtree-sitter-php-devel: libtree-sitter-php-devel libtree-sitter-php-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(tree-sitter-php) pkgconfig(tree-sitter-php_only) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/jamesjer/2349769-tree-sitter-php/srpm/tree-sitter-php.spec 2025-06-11 15:18:06.546528331 -0600 +++ /home/jamesjer/2349769-tree-sitter-php/srpm-unpacked/tree-sitter-php.spec 2025-03-06 17:00:00.000000000 -0700 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.7.3) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 1; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + Name: tree-sitter-php Version: 0.23.12 @@ -6,8 +16,11 @@ Source: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz BuildSystem: tree_sitter -BuildRequires: tree-sitter-srpm-macros >= 0.1.1 +BuildRequires: tree-sitter-srpm-macros >= 0.1.0-10 %{tree_sitter -l PHP} %changelog -%{autochangelog} +## START: Generated by rpmautospec +* Fri Mar 07 2025 Peter Oliver <rpm.uk> - 0.23.12-1 +- Uncommitted changes +## END: Generated by rpmautospec Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2349769 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api Disabled plugins: PHP, R, fonts, Perl, Haskell, Java, Ruby, Python, SugarActivity, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/tree-sitter-php
FEDORA-2025-0ec58d3af3 (tree-sitter-php-0.23.12-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-0ec58d3af3
FEDORA-2025-0ec58d3af3 (tree-sitter-php-0.23.12-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.