Spec URL: https://coherentpdf.com/fedora/ocaml-camlpdf.spec SRPM URL: https://coherentpdf.com/fedora/ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-1.fc41.src.rpm Description: OCaml library for reading, writing and modifying PDFs. The basis of the Cpdf command line tools. Fedora Account System Username: johnwhitington Notes: 1. I have included an ExcludeArch for i686, but Koji seems to ignore it. 2. The %build/%install sections are not gated on ocaml_native_compiler because CamlPDF's build system already knows how to detect bytecode-only environments. 3. Lint errors: ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcampdf_stubs.so ocaml-camlpdf-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo/usr/lib64/ocaml/camlpdf/camlpdf.a ocaml-camlpdf-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo/usr/lib64/ocaml/camlpdf/libcamlpdf_stubs.a These seem to be common with OCaml packages. ocaml-camlpdf-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation Q: Where, if anywhere, should the HTML ocamldoc output be installed? Other packages don't seem to install it. ocaml-camlpdf.spec: W: no-%check-section ocaml-camlpdf.spec: W: no-%check-section Q: What if anything is appropriate here?
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8982518 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2363088-ocaml-camlpdf/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08982518-ocaml-camlpdf/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.
Instead of the ExcludeArch, use: ExclusiveArch: %{ocaml_native_compiler} (assuming, as you probably do, you want to ignore bytecode arches). This macro is provided by this package and updated regularly: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ocaml-srpm-macros/commits/rawhide Unless there's a very good reason, you should drop this: %global debug_package %{nil} Your build system should be fixed to make sure that -g is passed to every compiler invocation (maybe with a configure-time switch to turn this on or off if you prefer). Also I'm confused about why you need to limit _smp_ncpus_max to 1, what is the reason for that?
Thanks Richard: 1. ExclusiveArch %{ocaml_native_compiler}. Thanks. Fixed. 2. %global debug_package %{nil}. Fails if removed. When compiling CamlPDF, the only invocations without -g are when ocamlc compiles .mli files. Is it really needed there? If so, I'll see if it can be fixed, though it may involve hackery. 3. _smp_ncpus_max to 1. This is because OCamlMakefile breaks under -j.
It shouldn't be needed to use -g for *.mli files (although I don't think it hurts). What's the error message?
Excerpt: + /usr/bin/find-debuginfo -j1 --strict-build-id -m -i --build-id-seed 2.8.1-1.fc41 --unique-debug-suffix -2.8.1-1.fc41.x86_64 --unique-debug-src-base ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-1.fc41.x86_64 --run-dwz --dwz-low-mem-die-limit 10000000 --dwz-max-die-limit 110000000 -S debugsourcefiles.list /builddir/build/BUILD/ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-build/camlpdf-2.8.1 find-debuginfo: starting Extracting debug info from 1 files Error while writing index for `/builddir/build/BUILD/ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-build/BUILDROOT/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so': No debugging symbols gdb-add-index: No index was created for /builddir/build/BUILD/ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-build/BUILDROOT/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so gdb-add-index: [Was there no debuginfo? Was there already an index?] DWARF-compressing 1 files sepdebugcrcfix: Updated 0 CRC32s, 1 CRC32s did match. Creating .debug symlinks for symlinks to ELF files find-debuginfo: done Full log: https://coherentpdf.com/fedora/build.log (Sidenote: I copied the %global debug_package %{nil} from here https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/OCaml/ so if that's wrong, it wants updating...)
It seems as if it's very specifically complaining about dllcamlpdf_stubs.so. Since that has the C bindings but you're not passing "-g" in the -ccopt list (ie. to the C compiler), maybe that's the problem?
Thanks. I have patched Makefile (and, in fact, OCamlMakefile too, since it wasn't passing -ccopts when building with -custom). There are now no complaints in the build log about debug information extraction. Fedpkg lint still fails with this, however: ocaml-camlpdf-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/ocaml/camlpdf/camlpdf.a ocaml-camlpdf-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/ocaml/camlpdf/libcamlpdf_stubs.a Koji builds ok. Here's the updated spec file, patch file, and srpm: https://www.coherentpdf.com/fedora/ocaml-camlpdf-2.zip And here's the build log: https://www.coherentpdf.com/fedora/build.log
Actually, that OCamlmakefile change may be wrong and/or unneeded. Let me take a look.
Right. It seems that the OCamlMakefile part of the patch (where we pass -ccopt "-o2 -g" even when building with -custom): a) Isn't required for the mockbuild debuginfo extraction to succeed. Just fixing Makefile alone fixes that. b) Means that when I build cpdf (which uses camlpdf) I get a cpdf.dSYM folder created, which was not previously the case. Is that good? c) -o2 here causes problems. So if we keep the OCamlMakefile part of the patch, we need to drop -o2. Which is fine. Here, for reference is the patch: --- Makefile.orig 2025-05-03 14:53:49.000000000 +0100 +++ Makefile 2025-05-03 14:53:30.000000000 +0100 @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ RESULT = camlpdf -CFLAGS = -o2 +CFLAGS = -o2 -g OCAMLFLAGS = -bin-annot OCAMLNCFLAGS = -g -safe-string OCAMLBCFLAGS = -g -safe-string --- OCamlMakefile.orig 2025-05-03 16:07:01.000000000 +0100 +++ OCamlMakefile 2025-05-03 16:06:47.000000000 +0100 @@ -614,7 +614,7 @@ ifneq ($(strip $(OBJ_LINK)),) ifdef CREATE_LIB - OBJS_LIBS := -cclib -l$(CLIB_BASE) $(CLIBS_OPTS) $(MAYBE_IDL) + OBJS_LIBS := -ccopt "$(CFLAGS)" -cclib -l$(CLIB_BASE) $(CLIBS_OPTS) $(MAYBE_IDL) else OBJS_LIBS := $(OBJ_LINK) $(CLIBS_OPTS) $(MAYBE_IDL) endif
For clarity, I have prepared two srpm/spec/patch/build-log archives: 1. With the minimal patch, just to Makefile: https://www.coherentpdf.com/fedora/ocaml-camlpdf-minpatch.zip 2. With both that and the patch to OCamlMakefile: https://www.coherentpdf.com/fedora/ocaml-camlpdf-maxpatch.zip In both cases the Koji build works, and there are no debug extraction errors in the build log.
Just a quick note to ask if you've some time to look at this again, or if there's anything else I can do to move this along. Thanks!
Sorry I don't have time to review this right now. If you ask on fedora devel list (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/) someone will be there who can review it.
I will take this review. (In reply to John Whitington from comment #5) > (Sidenote: I copied the %global debug_package %{nil} from here > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/OCaml/ so if > that's wrong, it wants updating...) Note that every instance of %global debug_package %{nil} in the guidelines looks like this: %ifnarch %{ocaml_native_compiler} %global debug_package %{nil} %endif That is, it applies only to bytecode-only architectures. OCaml packages without any C bindings do not create any ELF objects, so there is nothing to strip debuginfo out of. OCaml packages with C bindings should not use this, as there will still be a shared object that contains debuginfo even on bytecode-only architectures.
(In reply to John Whitington from comment #3) > 3. _smp_ncpus_max to 1. This is because OCamlMakefile breaks under -j. Does it? I've done a few builds in a row with this removed, and the build succeeded every time. What kind of breakage are you seeing? The minimal patch seems fine. As you noted, debuginfo seems to be generated correctly with that patch. I see that miniz 2.1.0 is bundled. As described in https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling, we should avoid that if possible. Note that miniz 3.0.2 is currently available from Fedora. Can you use the Fedora package instead of the bundled version? The rijndael-alg-fst.{c,h} and sha2.{c,h} files are also bundled versions of other projects. Refer to that guidelines URL for adding the correct "Provides: bundled(foo)" lines to the spec file if they cannot be unbundled. Also, if that code is to remain bundled, then the respective licenses must appear in the License field. A comment should also be added somewhere (typically right above the License field) indicating which source files each license pertains to. Please replace the Source line with this: Source: https://github.com/johnwhitington/camlpdf/archive/v%{version}/camlpdf-%{version}.tar.gz That gives us a tarball whose name contains the name of the project, and matches the name of the directory it unpacks into. Suggestion: if you add "BuildRequires: ocaml-rpm-macros", and add "%ocaml_files" to the end of %install, then you can replace the cluttered %files sections with just this: %files -f .ofiles %doc README.md %license LICENSE %files devel -f .ofiles-devel
Thanks for taking this on, Jerry. Here's the new version: https://www.coherentpdf.com/fedora/ocaml-camlpdf-attempt3.zip Build log: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=136654470 Notes: 1. OCamlMakefile and -j It's a well-known limitation. I couldn't provoke it on Fedora today, just like you, but it fails easily on MacOS. I'm also sure it failed once on Koji, because that's why I added it - to fix a broken build. Here's an example of an existing Fedora OCaml package which disables parallel builds for OCamlMakefile, albeit in a different way: %build # Parallel builds of this package fail. unset MAKEFLAGS See: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ocaml-mysql/blob/rawhide/f/ocaml-mysql.spec 2. Bundling of Miniz We can't do this. PDF files can contain a certain kind of malformed zlib data which requires a complicated dance to support. This involves our own changes to flatestubs.c (extracted from CamlZip) but also using v2.1.0 of miniz. Later versions don't allow even our workaround to read these malformed zlib streams. Unbundling Miniz would result in a Fedora CamlPDF which could not read some PDF files. 3. Bundling of Rijndael/SHA These files (and their OCaml stubs) are tiny extracts from OCaml CryptoKit. The logical thing to do, then, might be to depend on OCaml-CryptoKit. But the Fedora ocaml-cryptokit package bundles these same Rijndael/SHA C files (amongst others) anyway, rather than relying on the packages you mention! So, it's no improvement. 4. Licenses/Provides for Miniz/Rijndael/SHA Done. 5. Source line replacement Done 6. %files simplification suggestion Done
When you create new versions, it is helpful if you comment on this bug with updated "Spec URL" and "SRPM URL" lines like those at the top. The fedora-review tool can parse those lines and automatically download the spec and SRPM, which makes life easier for the reviewer. (In reply to John Whitington from comment #15) > 1. OCamlMakefile and -j > > It's a well-known limitation. I couldn't provoke it on Fedora today, just > like you, but it fails easily on MacOS. I'm also sure it failed once on > Koji, because that's why I added it - to fix a broken build. Okay, that's fine. Intermittent bugs are no fun at all. > 2. Bundling of Miniz > > We can't do this. PDF files can contain a certain kind of malformed zlib > data which requires a complicated dance to support. This involves our own > changes to flatestubs.c (extracted from CamlZip) but also using v2.1.0 of > miniz. Later versions don't allow even our workaround to read these > malformed zlib streams. > > Unbundling Miniz would result in a Fedora CamlPDF which could not read some > PDF files. Okay. Thanks for adding a comment to the spec file about this. > 3. Bundling of Rijndael/SHA > > These files (and their OCaml stubs) are tiny extracts from OCaml CryptoKit. > The logical thing to do, then, might be to depend on OCaml-CryptoKit. But > the Fedora ocaml-cryptokit package bundles these same Rijndael/SHA C files > (amongst others) anyway, rather than relying on the packages you mention! > So, it's no improvement. That's fine, then. Here is the full review: Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== Issues ===== - The License field is still incomplete. The files pdfafmdata.ml and pdfafmdata.source.ml carry another license. SPDX calls this license APAFML. It is on the allowed list for Fedora. - Please add a comment about the patch to the spec file - Is there any possibility of doing some basic tests in a %check script? For example, could examples/* be used to do something simple, just to verify that the package works at all? - Note the incorrect-fsf-address complaint from rpmlint below. Could you get that fixed upstream? The FSF now publishes license text that includes a web address instead of a street addess, for what it's worth: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [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: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: 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 Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later", "GNU Lesser General Public License", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "MIT License", "*No copyright* Adobe Postscript AFM License", "*No copyright* Public domain", "BSD 3-Clause License". 121 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jamesjer/ocaml-camlpdf- attempt3/review-ocaml-camlpdf/licensecheck.txt APAFML is missing; see pdfafmdata{.source,}.ml. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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. The required Provides: bundled(foo) clauses are present in the spec file. [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]: 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 2510 bytes in 1 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. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. It would nice to have a comment in the spec file about the patch. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. Is there any kind of test that could be run to verify basic functionality? [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]: 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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: 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 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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm ocaml-camlpdf-devel-2.8.1-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-1.fc44.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/tmpilbdo3e5')] checks: 32, packages: 3 ocaml-camlpdf-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation ocaml-camlpdf.spec: W: no-%check-section ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/ocaml-camlpdf/LICENSE 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings, 12 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.5 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: ocaml-camlpdf-debuginfo-2.8.1-1.fc44.x86_64.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/tmpgps4bjsk')] 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: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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 ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_state (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_named_value (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_string_length (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_alloc_small (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_copy_int32 (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_alloc (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_invalid_argument (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_raise (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_bad_caml_state (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_copy_string (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so caml_alloc_string (/usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so) ocaml-camlpdf-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation ocaml-camlpdf.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/ocaml-camlpdf/LICENSE 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 12 warnings, 13 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.4 s Unversioned so-files -------------------- ocaml-camlpdf: /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllcamlpdf_stubs.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/johnwhitington/camlpdf/archive/v2.8.1/camlpdf-2.8.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 148994c70016f1b02fee1f5548ff7d36ba7d0a5716e03f95011160fcc495657b CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 148994c70016f1b02fee1f5548ff7d36ba7d0a5716e03f95011160fcc495657b Requires -------- ocaml-camlpdf (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics) ocaml(Pdf) ocaml(Pdfafm) ocaml(Pdfafmdata) ocaml(Pdfcmap) ocaml(Pdfcodec) ocaml(Pdfcrypt) ocaml(Pdfcryptprimitives) ocaml(Pdfdest) ocaml(Pdfe) ocaml(Pdfflate) ocaml(Pdffun) ocaml(Pdfgenlex) ocaml(Pdfglyphlist) ocaml(Pdfio) ocaml(Pdfjpeg) ocaml(Pdfmarks) ocaml(Pdfops) ocaml(Pdfpage) ocaml(Pdfpagelabels) ocaml(Pdfpaper) ocaml(Pdfread) ocaml(Pdfspace) ocaml(Pdfst) ocaml(Pdftext) ocaml(Pdftransform) ocaml(Pdftree) ocaml(Pdfunits) ocaml(Pdfutil) ocaml(Pdfwrite) ocaml(Stdlib) ocaml(Stdlib__Array) ocaml(Stdlib__Bigarray) ocaml(Stdlib__Buffer) ocaml(Stdlib__Bytes) ocaml(Stdlib__Callback) ocaml(Stdlib__Char) ocaml(Stdlib__Complex) ocaml(Stdlib__Digest) ocaml(Stdlib__Either) ocaml(Stdlib__Filename) ocaml(Stdlib__Hashtbl) ocaml(Stdlib__Int32) ocaml(Stdlib__Int64) ocaml(Stdlib__List) ocaml(Stdlib__Nativeint) ocaml(Stdlib__Obj) ocaml(Stdlib__Printexc) ocaml(Stdlib__Printf) ocaml(Stdlib__Random) ocaml(Stdlib__Seq) ocaml(Stdlib__String) ocaml(Stdlib__Sys) ocaml(Stdlib__Uchar) rtld(GNU_HASH) ocaml-camlpdf-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ocaml(CamlinternalFormatBasics) ocaml(Pdf) ocaml(Pdfafm) ocaml(Pdfafmdata) ocaml(Pdfcmap) ocaml(Pdfcodec) ocaml(Pdfcrypt) ocaml(Pdfcryptprimitives) ocaml(Pdfdest) ocaml(Pdfe) ocaml(Pdfflate) ocaml(Pdffun) ocaml(Pdfgenlex) ocaml(Pdfglyphlist) ocaml(Pdfio) ocaml(Pdfjpeg) ocaml(Pdfmarks) ocaml(Pdfops) ocaml(Pdfpage) ocaml(Pdfpagelabels) ocaml(Pdfpaper) ocaml(Pdfread) ocaml(Pdfspace) ocaml(Pdfst) ocaml(Pdftext) ocaml(Pdftransform) ocaml(Pdftree) ocaml(Pdfunits) ocaml(Pdfutil) ocaml(Pdfwrite) ocaml(Stdlib) ocaml(Stdlib__Array) ocaml(Stdlib__Bigarray) ocaml(Stdlib__Buffer) ocaml(Stdlib__Bytes) ocaml(Stdlib__Callback) ocaml(Stdlib__Char) ocaml(Stdlib__Complex) ocaml(Stdlib__Digest) ocaml(Stdlib__Either) ocaml(Stdlib__Filename) ocaml(Stdlib__Hashtbl) ocaml(Stdlib__Int32) ocaml(Stdlib__Int64) ocaml(Stdlib__List) ocaml(Stdlib__Nativeint) ocaml(Stdlib__Obj) ocaml(Stdlib__Printexc) ocaml(Stdlib__Printf) ocaml(Stdlib__Random) ocaml(Stdlib__Seq) ocaml(Stdlib__String) ocaml(Stdlib__Sys) ocaml(Stdlib__Uchar) ocaml-camlpdf(x86-64) ocamlx(CamlinternalFormat) ocamlx(Pdf) ocamlx(Pdfafm) ocamlx(Pdfafmdata) ocamlx(Pdfcmap) ocamlx(Pdfcodec) ocamlx(Pdfcrypt) ocamlx(Pdfcryptprimitives) ocamlx(Pdfdest) ocamlx(Pdfe) ocamlx(Pdfflate) ocamlx(Pdffun) ocamlx(Pdfgenlex) ocamlx(Pdfglyphlist) ocamlx(Pdfio) ocamlx(Pdfjpeg) ocamlx(Pdfmarks) ocamlx(Pdfops) ocamlx(Pdfpage) ocamlx(Pdfpagelabels) ocamlx(Pdfpaper) ocamlx(Pdfread) ocamlx(Pdfspace) ocamlx(Pdfst) ocamlx(Pdftext) ocamlx(Pdftransform) ocamlx(Pdftree) ocamlx(Pdfunits) ocamlx(Pdfutil) ocamlx(Pdfwrite) ocamlx(Stdlib) ocamlx(Stdlib__Array) ocamlx(Stdlib__Bigarray) ocamlx(Stdlib__Buffer) ocamlx(Stdlib__Bytes) ocamlx(Stdlib__Callback) ocamlx(Stdlib__Digest) ocamlx(Stdlib__Domain) ocamlx(Stdlib__Filename) ocamlx(Stdlib__Hashtbl) ocamlx(Stdlib__Int32) ocamlx(Stdlib__Int64) ocamlx(Stdlib__List) ocamlx(Stdlib__Nativeint) ocamlx(Stdlib__Printexc) ocamlx(Stdlib__Printf) ocamlx(Stdlib__Random) ocamlx(Stdlib__String) ocamlx(Stdlib__Sys) Provides -------- ocaml-camlpdf: bundled(miniz) bundled(rijndael-alg-fst.c) bundled(sha2.c) ocaml(Pdf) ocaml(Pdfafm) ocaml(Pdfafmdata) ocaml(Pdfannot) ocaml(Pdfcmap) ocaml(Pdfcodec) ocaml(Pdfcrypt) ocaml(Pdfcryptprimitives) ocaml(Pdfdate) ocaml(Pdfdest) ocaml(Pdfe) ocaml(Pdfflate) ocaml(Pdffun) ocaml(Pdfgenlex) ocaml(Pdfglyphlist) ocaml(Pdfimage) ocaml(Pdfio) ocaml(Pdfjpeg) ocaml(Pdfmarks) ocaml(Pdfmerge) ocaml(Pdfocg) ocaml(Pdfops) ocaml(Pdfpage) ocaml(Pdfpagelabels) ocaml(Pdfpaper) ocaml(Pdfread) ocaml(Pdfspace) ocaml(Pdfst) ocaml(Pdfstandard14) ocaml(Pdftext) ocaml(Pdftransform) ocaml(Pdftree) ocaml(Pdfunits) ocaml(Pdfutil) ocaml(Pdfwrite) ocaml-camlpdf ocaml-camlpdf(x86-64) ocaml-camlpdf-devel: ocaml(Pdf) ocaml(Pdfafm) ocaml(Pdfafmdata) ocaml(Pdfannot) ocaml(Pdfcmap) ocaml(Pdfcodec) ocaml(Pdfcrypt) ocaml(Pdfcryptprimitives) ocaml(Pdfdate) ocaml(Pdfdest) ocaml(Pdfe) ocaml(Pdfflate) ocaml(Pdffun) ocaml(Pdfgenlex) ocaml(Pdfglyphlist) ocaml(Pdfimage) ocaml(Pdfio) ocaml(Pdfjpeg) ocaml(Pdfmarks) ocaml(Pdfmerge) ocaml(Pdfocg) ocaml(Pdfops) ocaml(Pdfpage) ocaml(Pdfpagelabels) ocaml(Pdfpaper) ocaml(Pdfread) ocaml(Pdfspace) ocaml(Pdfst) ocaml(Pdfstandard14) ocaml(Pdftext) ocaml(Pdftransform) ocaml(Pdftree) ocaml(Pdfunits) ocaml(Pdfutil) ocaml(Pdfwrite) ocaml-camlpdf-devel ocaml-camlpdf-devel(x86-64) ocamlx(Pdf) ocamlx(Pdfafm) ocamlx(Pdfafmdata) ocamlx(Pdfannot) ocamlx(Pdfcmap) ocamlx(Pdfcodec) ocamlx(Pdfcrypt) ocamlx(Pdfcryptprimitives) ocamlx(Pdfdate) ocamlx(Pdfdest) ocamlx(Pdfe) ocamlx(Pdfflate) ocamlx(Pdffun) ocamlx(Pdfgenlex) ocamlx(Pdfglyphlist) ocamlx(Pdfimage) ocamlx(Pdfio) ocamlx(Pdfjpeg) ocamlx(Pdfmarks) ocamlx(Pdfmerge) ocamlx(Pdfocg) ocamlx(Pdfops) ocamlx(Pdfpage) ocamlx(Pdfpagelabels) ocamlx(Pdfpaper) ocamlx(Pdfread) ocamlx(Pdfspace) ocamlx(Pdfst) ocamlx(Pdfstandard14) ocamlx(Pdftext) ocamlx(Pdftransform) ocamlx(Pdftree) ocamlx(Pdfunits) ocamlx(Pdfutil) ocamlx(Pdfwrite) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n ocaml-camlpdf -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Ocaml, Shell-api Disabled plugins: R, fonts, Perl, Haskell, Ruby, Java, SugarActivity, Python, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Thanks. Here's the next attempt: Spec URL: https://coherentpdf.com/fedora4/ocaml-camlpdf.spec SRPM URL: https://coherentpdf.com/fedora4/ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-1.fc41.src.rpm Koji log: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=136727055 1 The License field is still incomplete. The files pdfafmdata.ml and pdfafmdata.source.ml carry another license. SPDX calls this license APAFML. It is on the allowed list for Fedora. Done. 2 Please add a comment about the patch to the spec file Done. 3 Is there any possibility of doing some basic tests in a %check script? For example, could examples/* be used to do something simple, just to verify that the package works at all? Done. We build pdfhello.ml, run it to generate hello.pdf and see if the file exists. 4 Note the incorrect-fsf-address complaint from rpmlint below. Could you get that fixed upstream? The FSF now publishes license text that includes a web address instead of a street addess, for what it's worth: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1.html Done upstream.
Created attachment 2105670 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8982518 to 9520469
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9520469 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2363088-ocaml-camlpdf/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09520469-ocaml-camlpdf/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.
That looks great. This package is APPROVED. Please let Richard Jones know that he should add this package to his list of OCaml packages to be rebuilt whenever a mass OCaml package rebuild is needed.
Thanks Jerry! I'm now working on the Cpdf package, but I'll open that as another bug.
I've submitted the Cpdf package for review here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2395215 Jerry: Of course I shall understand if you don't have the time to look at this one.
You sent comment 22 while I was on vacation. I saw it and made a mental note to look at that review when I got home. I then promptly lost the mental note and just remembered about it right now. Sorry for the delay.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ocaml-camlpdf
FEDORA-2025-cac3cae0d9 (ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-2.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-cac3cae0d9
FEDORA-2025-cac3cae0d9 (ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-2.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-50c019f296 (ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-5.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-50c019f296
FEDORA-2025-6f3dc6935d (ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-5.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-6f3dc6935d
FEDORA-2025-50c019f296 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-50c019f296 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-50c019f296 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-0d099d0415 has been pushed to the Fedora 42 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-0d099d0415 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-0d099d0415 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-6f3dc6935d has been pushed to the Fedora 41 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-6f3dc6935d \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-6f3dc6935d See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-50c019f296 (ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-5.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-0d099d0415 (ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-5.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-6f3dc6935d (ocaml-camlpdf-2.8.1-5.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.