http://balajig8.fedorapeople.org/packages/iperf.spec http://balajig8.fedorapeople.org/packages/iperf-3.0b4-1.fc14.src.rpm Measurement tool for TCP/UDP bandwidth performance
Hey G. Just a few quick things I noticed to be fixed before I do my review checklist. ;) 1. The spec and Name: should be 'iperf3' here, right? Or are you intending to replace/update the existing iperf package? 2. The version here is not right. You should not have things like 'b4' in version. ;) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages I think you want: Version: 3.0 Release: 0.0.b4%{?dist} Then when the final 3.0 comes out, Release goes to 1 and it updates correctly from this beta version. If you make changes to packaging before that you can use: Release: 0.1.b4%{?dist} etc. And the update path works. ;) 3. You probibly don't want to ship the static library: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries I would suggest removing the .a and header files at the end of %install and then commenting out the -devel subpackage entirely. You could add it back in when/if they have a dynamic library or someone really needs the static one. ;) Anyhow, if you could look at those, I could start a formal review after that. Thanks!
Kevin, Updated with your comments and uploaded to the following location http://balajig8.fedorapeople.org/packages/iperf3.spec http://balajig8.fedorapeople.org/packages/iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc14.src.rpm Thanks for your time. Thanks, Cheers, - Balaji
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. See below - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. See below - License See below - License field in spec matches See below - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: fde024a200b064b54accd1959f7e642e iperf-3.0b4.tar.gz fde024a200b064b54accd1959f7e642e iperf-3.0b4.tar.gz.orig See below - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should function as described. OK - Should have sane scriptlets. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. Can you pick one of "$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" or "%{buildroot}" and use that only in the spec. Makes things more readable. ;) 2. Some of the source files contain: * Copyright (c) 2009, The Regents of the University of California, through * Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (subject to receipt of any required * approvals from the U.S. Dept. of Energy). All rights reserved. I guess I would suggest a mail to upstream developers. Ask them if these files really are supposed to be released under the BSD license. :( 3. Can you avoid %makeinstall ? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used 4. It looks like it's looking for uuid: checking for uuid_create... no You might add uuid-devel to BuildRequires? 5. rpmlint says: iperf3.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.0b4-2 ['3.0-0.0.b4.fc15', '3.0-0.0.b4'] the changelog should not have "3.0b4-2" but "3.0-0.0.b4"
Kevin, Thanks for the comments. Have uploaded the updated spec file and the SRPMs in the same path. Have sent an email to the up-stream guys regarding the license issues. Thanks, Cheers, - Balaji
ok, 1, 3, 4, 5 all look good. Just waiting to hear back on the legal item in 2. ;) Thanks for the fixes.
Kevin, Thanks a lot.I hope this gets pushed in early :) Cheers, - Balaji
Upstream replied. They added a note as to what license this is under, but there is still the 'all rights reserved' part, so not sure what to do here. Do they have the right to change the distribution of something thats saying it's all rights reserved and owned by The Regents of the University of California? http://groups.google.com/group/iperf-dev/t/3ac7f9aafca8419d Blocking on LEGAL to review.
Not a problem. "All Rights Reserved" is a no-op, and doesn't affect the licensing. Lifting FE-Legal.
Everything looks good to me here now, so this package is APPROVED.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: iperf3 Short Description: Measurement tool for TCP/UDP bandwidth performance Owners: balajig8 kevin Branches: f14 f15 e16 InitialCC: balajig8 kevin
You requested an invalid branch "e16". I'm not sure if this was a typo for "f16" (in which case it's too early) or for "el6" so I've simply done the f14 and f15 branches. If you did want an el6 branch, feel free to submit a change request. Git done (by process-git-requests).
iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc15
iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc14
iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository.
iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
iperf3-3.0-0.0.b4.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository.
Could you provide iperf3 for el6, and possibly el5? I can co-maint for EPEL if needed. Thank you.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: iperf3 New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: strobert kevin adding EPEL branches
Git done (by process-git-requests).
iperf3-3.0-0.2.b4.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iperf3-3.0-0.2.b4.el5
iperf3-3.0-0.2.b4.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/iperf3-3.0-0.2.b4.el6
iperf3-3.0-0.2.b4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository.
This is all in and can be closed out.
iperf3-3.0-0.2.b4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
iperf3-3.0-0.2.b4.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository.