Bug 704112 - Review Request: recutils - A set of tools to access GNU recfile databases
Summary: Review Request: recutils - A set of tools to access GNU recfile databases
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Gwyn Ciesla
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-05-12 08:04 UTC by Daiki Ueno
Modified: 2011-11-25 02:23 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: recutils-1.4-1.fc15
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-10-20 01:14:44 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
gwync: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Daiki Ueno 2011-05-12 08:04:58 UTC
Spec URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/recutils/recutils.spec
SRPM URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/recutils/recutils-1.3-1.fc15.src.rpm
Description:
Recutils is a set of tools and libraries to access human-editable,
text-based databases called recfiles. The data is stored as a sequence
of records, each record containing an arbitrary number of named
fields.

Comment 1 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-17 14:55:52 UTC
The posted spec differs from the SRPM, which lacks the patch.  But I found the current one, reviewing.

Comment 2 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-17 15:15:39 UTC
Build dies on F15:

make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/limb/rpmbuild/BUILD/recutils-1.3'
+ '%{_emacs_bytecompile}' etc/rec-mode.el

Looks like a dropped ?, should be %{?_emacs_bytecompile} 

But after fixing that:

+ etc/rec-mode.el
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.CTEadp: line 55: etc/rec-mode.el: Permission denied

Comment 3 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-17 15:56:02 UTC
Looks like you need to add BuildRequires: emacs-common to fix that.

But then all the tests fail, killing the build.

Comment 4 Daiki Ueno 2011-10-18 03:05:53 UTC
(In reply to comment #3)
> Looks like you need to add BuildRequires: emacs-common to fix that.

Thanks for looking at this.  Updated the spec and SRPM:

Spec URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/recutils/recutils.spec
SRPM URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/recutils/recutils-1.3-3.fc16.src.rpm

> But then all the tests fail, killing the build.

It seems that rpath setting in executables is necessary when running the test suite.  I ended up keeping the rpath setting until %check and removing it in %install using chrpath.

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-18 03:37:29 UTC
SPEC and SRPM differ.  Based on SRPM:

This builds. :)

Good:

- rpmlint checks return:

recutils.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) recfile -> refile, rec file, rec-file
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

recutils.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recfiles -> refiles, rec files, rec-files
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

Ignore.

recutils.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.gnu.org/software/recutils/ <urlopen error timed out>
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.

Valid, but was slow in my browser tonight.

recutils-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

recutils-libs.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Runtime -> Run time, Run-time, Rudiment
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.

Ignore.

recutils-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/librec.so.0.0.0 exit.5
This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork()
context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library
function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the
error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any
state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an
actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the
situation.

recutils-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/librec.so.0.0.0 _exit.5
This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork()
context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library
function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the
error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up any
state that the program has. It is preferred for the library to return an
actual error code and let the calling program decide how to handle the
situation.

Can these be corrected?  If so, is it upstreamable?

recutils-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

Not much to include here.

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license ( GPLv3+ ) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file 

Moc build to test BRs in progress.

Comment 6 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-18 03:44:22 UTC
BRs are good, just docs and exit().

Comment 7 Daiki Ueno 2011-10-18 07:26:25 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)

> recutils-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/librec.so.0.0.0
> _exit.5
[...]
> 
> Can these be corrected?  If so, is it upstreamable?

I think some of them could be easily corrected and upstreamable, but not entirely, for some reason:

- some exit() call are in the code generated by flex
- other exit() calls are in libgnu (gnulib), maintained in a separate upstream project

For the time being I addressed the easy part only.  Will ask the upstream later.

> recutils-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
> documentation files.
> 
> Not much to include here.

I merged -libs subpackage into the base package, so this warning should be removed now.

Spec URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/recutils/recutils.spec
SRPM URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/recutils/recutils-1.3-4.fc16.src.rpm

Comment 8 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-18 13:08:22 UTC
Ok.  I was going to question the utility of merging -libs in, but the size difference is negligible.

APPROVED.

Comment 9 Daiki Ueno 2011-10-19 00:32:27 UTC
Thanks for the review.

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: recutils
Short Description: A set of tools to access GNU recfile databases
Owners: ueno
Branches: f16 f15 f14
InitialCC:

Comment 10 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-19 12:26:51 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2011-10-20 01:13:40 UTC
recutils-1.3-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/recutils-1.3-4.fc15

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2011-10-20 01:13:48 UTC
recutils-1.3-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/recutils-1.3-4.fc14

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2011-10-20 01:13:56 UTC
recutils-1.3-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/recutils-1.3-4.fc16

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2011-11-11 02:53:11 UTC
recutils-1.4-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/recutils-1.4-1.fc16

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2011-11-11 02:53:21 UTC
recutils-1.4-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/recutils-1.4-1.fc15

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2011-11-11 02:53:31 UTC
recutils-1.4-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/recutils-1.4-1.fc14

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2011-11-25 01:57:12 UTC
recutils-1.4-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2011-11-25 02:23:13 UTC
recutils-1.4-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.