spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/sonic.spec srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/sonic-0.2.0%5E20210316gitba33141-1.fc41.src.rpm description: Sonic is a simple algorithm for speeding up or slowing down speech. However, it's optimized for speed ups of over 2X, unlike previous algorithms for changing speech rate. The Sonic library is a very simple ANSI C library that is designed to easily be integrated into streaming voice applications, like TTS back ends. The primary motivation behind Sonic is to enable the blind and visually impaired to improve their productivity with open source speech engines, like espeak. Sonic can also be used by the sighted. For example, Sonic can improve the experience of listening to an audio book on an Android phone. fas: fed500 Reproducible: Always
The spec is clear enough. Anything specific you'd want an answer for (because of the needinfo), or is this a package review request? I might get to it, but definitely not this week, so, feel free anyone else to do it.
Lukáš, if you could review when you have time, that would be great. It is a dependency of RHVoice https://github.com/RHVoice/RHVoice/tree/master/src/third-party/sonic
Went through of the spec, here is some comments before doing the full review: - Is the static library really needed? If not, remove it in %install (so no -static package). - Would the library be useful for others? I.e. would it make sense to package the library into "libsonic" package and "sonic" package Requires it? - Personally I would do string substitution on the "shortcommit": > %global shortcommit %{sub %{commit} 1 7} - Preemptively consider Epoch: > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{?epoch:%{epoch}:}%{version}-%{release} - There is one extra line break before %install and %changelog, consider removing the extra line breaks
Thanks for your feedback. spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/sonic.spec srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/sonic-0.2.0^20210316gitba33141-1.fc42.src.rpm (In reply to Tomi Lähteenmäki from comment #3) > Went through of the spec, here is some comments before doing the full review: > > - Is the static library really needed? If not, remove it in %install (so no > -static package). Done. > > - Would the library be useful for others? I.e. would it make sense to > package the library into "libsonic" package and "sonic" package Requires it? > Done. > - Personally I would do string substitution on the "shortcommit": > > > %global shortcommit %{sub %{commit} 1 7} > Done. > - Preemptively consider Epoch: > > > Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{?epoch:%{epoch}:}%{version}-%{release} > Left as is for now. > - There is one extra line break before %install and %changelog, consider > removing the extra line breaks Done.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9454652 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2371047-sonic/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09454652-sonic/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.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= [!]: libsonic.so.0 should be in libsonic package, i.e. only libsonic.so should be in libsonic-devel package. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: 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. [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: "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "Apache License 2.0", "Unknown or generated". 26 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/lihis/sonic/2371047-sonic/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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. [-]: 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 1918 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: 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. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in libsonic [x]: 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]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: sonic-0.2.0^20210316gitba33141-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm libsonic-0.2.0^20210316gitba33141-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm libsonic-devel-0.2.0^20210316gitba33141-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm sonic-0.2.0^20210316gitba33141-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-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/tmpuwp1x0oa')] checks: 32, packages: 4 sonic.src: E: spelling-error ('espeak', '%description -l en_US espeak -> speak, bespeak, e speak') sonic.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('espeak', '%description -l en_US espeak -> speak, bespeak, e speak') libsonic.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libsonic.so.0.3.0 libsonic.so libsonic-devel.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/libsonic.so.0 libsonic.so.0.3.0 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 1 warnings, 26 filtered, 3 badness; has taken 0.5 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: sonic-debuginfo-0.2.0^20210316gitba33141-1.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-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/tmpdr8qawes')] checks: 32, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 10 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: 4 sonic.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('espeak', '%description -l en_US espeak -> speak, bespeak, e speak') libsonic.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libsonic.so.0.3.0 libsonic.so libsonic-devel.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib64/libsonic.so.0 libsonic.so.0.3.0 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings, 32 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.4 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/waywardgeek/sonic/archive/ba331411f17702e01f6c2d7016eefebaa695871f/sonic-ba33141.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 469a66b6b54bb825efdc4cbaef1bbd45f87ddc6ce9f73ce7b1060f26b33ec6a9 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 469a66b6b54bb825efdc4cbaef1bbd45f87ddc6ce9f73ce7b1060f26b33ec6a9 Requires -------- sonic (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libsonic(x86-64) rtld(GNU_HASH) libsonic (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) libsonic-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libsonic(x86-64) libsonic.so()(64bit) Provides -------- sonic: sonic sonic(x86-64) libsonic: libsonic libsonic(x86-64) libsonic.so()(64bit) libsonic-devel: libsonic-devel libsonic-devel(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2371047 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: fonts, PHP, Perl, SugarActivity, Java, R, Ocaml, Haskell, Python Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
> [!]: libsonic.so.0 should be in libsonic package, i.e. only libsonic.so should be in libsonic-devel package. Thanks. Fixed. spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/sonic.spec srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/sonic-0.2.0^20210316gitba33141-1.fc42.src.rpm
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9456540 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2371047-sonic/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09456540-sonic/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.
[fedora-review-service-build]
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9456994 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2371047-sonic/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09456994-sonic/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.
Approved.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/sonic