Hide Forgot
Spec URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/junk/python26-elixir.spec SRPM URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/junk/python26-elixir-0.7.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Elixir is a declarative layer on top of SQLAlchemy. It is a fairly thin wrapper, which provides the ability to define model objects following the Active Record design pattern, and using a DSL syntax similar to that of the Ruby on Rails ActiveRecord system. Elixir does not intend to replace SQLAlchemy's core features, but instead focuses on providing a simpler syntax for defining model objects when you do not need the full expressiveness of SQLAlchemy's manual mapper definitions. == $ rpmlint SRPMS/python26-elixir-0.7.1-1.fc14.src.rpm sh: /usr/bin/python2.6: No such file or directory sh: /usr/bin/python2.6: No such file or directory python26-elixir.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://cheeseshop.python.org/packages/source/E/Elixir/Elixir-0.7.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Is that package really just for python 2.6? If so, then you shouldn't build this pacakge for fedora 14, because the python version for fedora 14 is python 2.7. In fedora 14, is imposible to make an rpmbuild to that spec, because the build requierements (which are based on python 2.6) don't even exist in the fedora 14 repository, there isn't any "python26-devel", there is just "python-devel". I can see you made this building using a rawhide version of fedora... I guess that's the way you could build the RPMs. -If that library can be used for later versions of python, so you must change the dependences, for example, instead of "python26-devel", use "python-devel". -Else, you cannot do anything, at least you don't build this package for fedora 14 or later.
This package is for Python26 which is available from EPEL.
Wanted to get this package built for Fedora base Python, RHEL base Python, and Python26: Spec URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/junk/python-elixir.spec SRPM URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/junk/python-elixir-0.7.1-1.fc14.src.rpm $ rpmlint SPECS/python-elixir.spec SPECS/python-elixir.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://cheeseshop.python.org/packages/source/E/Elixir/Elixir-0.7.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. ]$ rpmlint SRPMS/python-elixir-0.7.1-1.fc14.src.rpm python-elixir.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://cheeseshop.python.org/packages/source/E/Elixir/Elixir-0.7.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Looks good. Unfortunately (as I thought might be the case) the python26 files are bying byte-compiled with python2.4. I pulled the files out of the rpm with rpm2cpio to have a look: $ file usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/__init__.pyo usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/__init__.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled I've heard it rumored that there is a hack around this... but I need to research a bit.
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=python26.git;a=blob;f=macros.python26;h=d3e3f9858735b51cee0f71baac2fcf721f4f503e;hb=refs/heads/el5/master contains "%__python26_os_install_post", an alternate implementation of __os_install_post. Looks like we need a %__multiple_pythons_os_install_post, as per what Fedora 13's rpm: see bug 531117
Hello Dave, Thanks a lot for sharing this patch! I verified with a local test this patch byte compiles my python26 package with python2.6 binary rather than python2.4. Jeffrey-
Thanks to a change in Python26, we can now use '__multiple_python_os_install_post'. I have verified the files are properly byte compiled: $ file python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/*py[co] python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/collection.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/collection.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/entity.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/entity.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/events.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/events.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/fields.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/fields.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/__init__.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/__init__.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/options.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/options.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/properties.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/properties.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/py23compat.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/py23compat.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/relationships.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/relationships.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/statements.pyc: python 2.4 byte-compiled python/usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/elixir/statements.pyo: python 2.4 byte-compiled $ file python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/*py[co] python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/collection.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/collection.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/entity.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/entity.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/events.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/events.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/fields.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/fields.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/__init__.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/__init__.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/options.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/options.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/properties.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/properties.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/py23compat.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/py23compat.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/relationships.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/relationships.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/statements.pyc: python 2.6 byte-compiled python26/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/elixir/statements.pyo: python 2.6 byte-compiled === SPEC: http://flip-edesign.com/source/junk/python-elixir.spec SRPM: http://flip-edesign.com/source/junk/python-elixir-0.7.1-3.fc14.src.rpm == $ rpmlint SPECS/python-elixir.spec SPECS/python-elixir.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://cheeseshop.python.org/packages/source/E/Elixir/Elixir-0.7.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint SRPMS/python-elixir-0.7.1-3.fc14.src.rpm python-elixir.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US python-elixir.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://cheeseshop.python.org/packages/source/E/Elixir/Elixir-0.7.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Everything looks good. Just a few comments: Notify upstream that the LICENSE file is not included with its tarbal... this is probably because they are using setuptools to generate the tarbal and upload it to PyPi. There are tests under ./tests but I don't understand how those are to be run as they don't look like standard tests. Elixir supports python 3, therefore we should also include a python3 sub package for Fedora > 12 and el > 5: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Common_SRPM_vs_split_SRPMs Its more or less the same as we are doing with python26... but only when fedora > 12 and/or rhel > 5. REVIEW: [ pass ] MUST rpmlint must be run on every package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ParagNemade/CommonRpmlintErrors [ pass ] MUST The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines [ pass ] MUST The spec file name must match the base package %{name} http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Spec_file_name [ pass ] MUST The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses [ pass ] MUST The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#Fedora_Licensing [ pass ] 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 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text [ pass ] MUST The spec file must be written in American English. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#summary [ pass ] MUST The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Referencing_Source [ pass ] MUST The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Architecture_Support [ pass ] 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. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Architecture_Build_Failures [ pass ] MUST All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 [ pass ] MUST The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files [ pass ] MUST Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shared_Libraries [ pass ] MUST If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#RelocatablePackages [ pass ] MUST A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FileAndDirectoryOwnership [ pass ] MUST A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles [ pass ] MUST Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions [ pass ] MUST Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#.25clean [ pass ] MUST The package must contain code, or permissible content. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#CodeVsContent [ pass ] MUST Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation [ pass ] MUST If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation [ pass ] MUST Header files must be in a -devel package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages [ pass ] MUST Static libraries must be in a -static package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries [ pass ] MUST Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability). http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PkgconfigFiles [ pass ] MUST If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that ends in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. This can also be achieved by having the .so installed as 755 http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines#cite_ref-devel_18-1 [ pass ] MUST In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#RequiringBasePackage [ pass ] MUST Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries [ pass ] MUST Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop [ pass ] MUST Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FileAndDirectoryOwnership [ pass ] MUST At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#.25install_section [ pass ] MUST All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilenameEncoding
Hey BJ, As our test show, elixer is not Python 3 compatible yet (one issue we noticed is print is not being ran as a function, this is new to python3). I will look over the other point you made and get back to you. Thanks
Message to the Elixir Group regrading missing Test and LICENSE: http://groups.google.com/group/sqlelixir/browse_thread/thread/5cf610e9308a3d03?hl=en
In that case, everything looks good. Pass.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-elixir Short Description: Elixir is a declarative layer on top of SQLAlchemy. Owners: jeffreyness derks Branches: el5
Incorrect SCM Request above....
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-elixir Short Description: Elixir is a declarative layer on top of SQLAlchemy. Owners: jeffreyness derks Branches: el5 f14 f15
Lets add el6 as well
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-elixir Short Description: Elixir is a declarative layer on top of SQLAlchemy. Owners: jeffreyness derks Branches: el5 el6 f14 f15
this already exists in fedora
Seems with all the python26 packages we are porting to EPEL (and making the needed byte-code compile changes to the root python26 package) this one got mixed in.. My apologizes this should of been one of the packages we contacted EPEL python-elixir maintainer for. I'm going to close out this bug and work with EPEL maintainer.