Bug 733925 - Review Request: libdatrie - double-array trie implementation library
Review Request: libdatrie - double-array trie implementation library
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of bug 1062542
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
unspecified Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2011-08-28 12:38 EDT by Aurimas Černius
Modified: 2014-02-07 03:51 EST (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-12-16 16:54:22 EST
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Aurimas Černius 2011-08-28 12:38:29 EDT
Spec URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/3/3f/Libdatrie.spec
SRPM URL: https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/5/5e/Libdatrie-0.2.4-1.src.rpm
Description: A library, implementing double-array trie data structure. You can find the detailed description in upstream home page:
http://linux.thai.net/~thep/datrie/datrie.html
Comment 1 Aurimas Černius 2011-08-28 12:41:51 EDT
Added FE-NEEDSPONSOR to blocks, since it's my first package.
Comment 2 Michael Schwendt 2011-09-03 04:57:35 EDT
Please at least skim over the following pages, especially with regard to search terms relevant to your package. For example, you could have searched for a section covering static and shared libraries:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#SoftwareLicenses


* MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.

Which does not imply that only a reviewer should do this. It's a tool for packagers.


> Libdatrie-0.2.4-1.src.rpm

rpmlint says something about this.


> Name:      libdatrie
> Group:     Development/Libraries

Base library packages typically go into group "System Environment/Libraries".
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag


> Release:   1

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag

If you don't like the dist tag, a brief rationale would be appreciated.


> Summary:   An Implementation of Double-Array Trie

In the installer and package tools, leading "An", "A", "The" merely decrease readability. Many book/report titles also omit them to be even more concise.

Summary: Implementation of Double-Array Trie


> License:   LGPLv2.1+

rpmlint says something about this.


> BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag


> %install
> rm -rf %{buildroot}

> %clean
> rm -rf %{buildroot}

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean


> %package  devel
> Summary:  Development files for libdatrie

Notice you don't have a leading article here either. ;)

> Requires: libdatrie

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package


> %defattr(-,root,root,-)

Either at the beginning of all sections or omitted because of:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions


> %{_libdir}/libdatrie.so.1*

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shared_Libraries


> %{_libdir}/libdatrie.a
> %{_libdir}/libdatrie.la

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries


> %package   doc
> Requires:  libdatrie

Clearly the documentation subpackage does not depend on the library. See also:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Explicit_Requires

> Group:     Development/Libraries

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Documentation

> %files doc
> %{_datadir}/doc/datrie/
> %{_datadir}/doc/libdatrie/

Any particular reason why the documentation is not put into %{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-%{version} - but split up into two directories plus the base library package adding another doc directory?

> %doc AUTHORS COPYING README

What about file NEWS?


> %{_datadir}/man/man1/trietool-0.2.1.gz

There is %{_mandir} = %{_datadir}/man
Comment 3 Aurimas Černius 2011-09-11 10:29:03 EDT
I've uploaded the updated spec and SRPM, the same links as in the first post.

Below is the output of rpmlint for all rpms:


$ rpmlint libdatrie-0.2.4-2.fc15.i686.rpm
libdatrie.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US trie -> tire, true, tie
libdatrie.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Trie -> Teri, Brie, Erie
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

$ rpmlint libdatrie-debuginfo-0.2.4-2.fc15.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint libdatrie-devel-0.2.4-2.fc15.i686.rpm
libdatrie-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
libdatrie-devel.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary trietool-0.2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

$ rpmlint libdatrie-doc-0.2.4-2.fc15.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint libdatrie-0.2.4-2.fc15.src.rpm
libdatrie.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US trie -> tire, true, tie
libdatrie.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Trie -> Teri, Brie, Erie
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
Comment 4 Rex Dieter 2012-04-19 16:04:07 EDT
fyi, in the future, when making modifications/updates to your packaging, bump Release, and make sure to include a changelog entry detailing the changes.
Comment 5 Matthias Runge 2012-06-04 04:19:39 EDT
Aurimas, you should especially read

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group

To show, you're familiar with packaging guidelines, you should do a few (5-10, depending on the your sponsor) inofficial reviews.
Comment 6 Matthias Runge 2012-12-14 04:44:41 EST
Any progress here? Aurimas, are you still interested?
Comment 7 Aurimas Černius 2012-12-16 16:09:32 EST
I'm afraid I don't have enough time for this, so I think I better spend my time contributing where I do now.
Comment 8 Christopher Meng 2014-02-07 03:51:45 EST

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1062542 ***

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