Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 241656
Review Request: ocaml-csv - OCaml library for reading and writing CSV files
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:12:05 EST
Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml-csv.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml-csv-1.1.6-1.src.rpm Description: This is an OCaml library for reading and writing CSV (comma-separated values) files.
Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-csv.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-csv-1.1.6-2.src.rpm Updated to latest OCaml packaging guidelines. Built against OCaml 3.10. Tested against bytecode-only architectures.
This fails to build for me due to a missing dependency on ocaml-extlib-devel.
Added dependency on bug 240655.
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. [WARNING] $ rpmlint ocaml-csv-1.1.6-2.src.rpm W: ocaml-csv invalid-license LGPL Needs fixing $ rpmlint ocaml-csv-1.1.6-2.fc8.x86_64.rpm W: ocaml-csv devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/ocaml/csv/csv.cmi Bogus warning W: ocaml-csv invalid-license LGPL Needs fixing E: ocaml-csv only-non-binary-in-usr-lib Bogus Error for OCaml packages $ rpmlint ocaml-csv-devel-1.1.6-2.fc8.x86_64.rpm W: ocaml-csv-devel invalid-license LGPL Needs fixing - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [OK] - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [OK] - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [OK] - MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license [OK] - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [WARNING: tar.gz contains no license info. Website says LGPL + OCaml Linking Exception & links to LGPLv3. Please clarify specfile & upstream] - MUST: 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 must be included in %doc. [OK] - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [OK] - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [OK] - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [OK] - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. [OK x86_64 rawhide] - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. [N/A] - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires [OK] - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. [N/A] - MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [N/A] - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review. [N/A] - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. [OK] - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. [OK] - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. [OK] - MUST: Each package must have a %clean section [OK] - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros [OK] - MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [OK] - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage. [N/A] - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. [N/A] - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [OK] - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [N/A] - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). [N/A] - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. [N/A] - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} [OK] - MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives [N/A] - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file [N/A] - MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. [OK] - MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). See Prepping BuildRoot For %install for details. [OK] - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [OK] OK, all supplementary guidelines for OCaml at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/OCaml Will approve pending clarification of LGPL version, and addition of OCaml Linker Exception note to License.
Correction: needs to have an ExcludeArch: ppc64, since the ocaml base package has an ExcludeArch.
Updated version: Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-csv.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-csv-1.1.6-3.src.rpm * Fri Aug 24 2007 Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com> - 1.1.6-3 - License clarified to LGPLv2+ (and fixed/clarified upstream). - Added ExcludeArch ppc64 A note on the "OCaml linking exception": This is an additional permission/freedom given to users of OCaml libraries which allows users to disregard section 6 of the LGPL (the one where a proprietary app has to ship a relinkable binary), as this requirement makes no sense for OCaml libraries because of the way they are linked. Since it's an additional freedom given to users of the library, I didn't include it in the License field. Library users may if they want confine themselves to the additional terms of LGPLv2 section 6. http://caml.inria.fr/pub/old_caml_site/ocaml/LICENSE.html
All items addressed -> APPROVED
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: ocaml-csv Short Description: OCaml library for reading and writing CSV files Owners: rjones@redhat.com Branches: F-7 InitialCC: rjones@redhat.com Cvsextras Commits: yes
moving forward please use your Fedora Account System name in requests, not email. cvs done.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: ocaml-csv New Branches: EL-5
cvs done.