Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
SPEC Url: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aekoroglu/fedora/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/10758620-fastrpc/fastrpc.spec SRPM Url: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aekoroglu/fedora/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/10758620-fastrpc/fastrpc-1.0.6-1.fc45.src.rpm Description: FastRPC is Qualcomm's userspace library that facilitates efficient remote procedure calls between the CPU and DSP for high-performance computing. Reproducible: Always
Thank you for working on this. I've done a full review and found a few small issues which may need to be fixed: Must fix: - "%post" for the services should be "%post service" since the .service files are in the -service sub-package. - Same for %preun and %postun - "BuildRequires: systemd-units" should be "BuildRequires: systemd-rpm-macros" Maybe fix: - The service daemons seem to not depend on the libraries, so the: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in the -service subpackage seems unnecessary? Or do these get dl-opened? Maybe just add a duplicate %license line to the "%files service" and drop the Requires. - What is the common use-case of this. Do we expect most users to have the daemons installed ? And if yes do they then need the libraries at all? If the daemons are the common use-case maybe put them in the main package and add a -libs Might also be good to check what the Debian packages do here and mirror that. sub-package for the libs? (and make -devel depend on the -libs)
Hello Hans, Thanks for the review, new build includes the requested changes: - %post / %preun / %postun are now scoped to the services sub-pkg - BuildRequires: systemd-units -> systemd-rpm-macros Yes, the daemons dlopen() their per-DSP listener library at runtime, therefore I'd prefer to leave this explicit. In the common use case the libraries are the primary consumer interface, so I'd rather keep the *.so files in the main and the daemons+systemd files in services package. There's also no need to duplicate %license in the services sub-pkg since the base package is guaranteed to be installed anyway. Debian splits it almost the same way: fastrpc-support: daemons + systemd files libfastrpc1: shared libs libfastrpc1-dev: headers and so symlinks SPEC Url: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aekoroglu/fedora/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/10774985-fastrpc/fastrpc.spec SRPM Url: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aekoroglu/fedora/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/10774985-fastrpc/fastrpc-1.0.6-1.fc45.src.rpm
Full package review: Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. [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. [x]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 14445 bytes in 1 files. [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 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]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in fastrpc-services [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [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. [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [-]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [-]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. [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. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Following rpmlint messages can be ignored: W: no-manual-page-for-binary W: no-documentation W: no-%check-section W: name-repeated-in-summary [-]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Approved!
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/fastrpc Monitoring: Wasn't able to create project in Anitya. You can create it manually on: `https://release-monitoring.org`