Spec URL: ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader-0.7-2.src.rpm Description: gobi_loader is a firmware loader for Qualcomm Gobi USB chipsets. These devices appear in an uninitialized state when power is applied and require firmware to be loaded before they can be used as modems. gobi_loader adds a udev rule that will trigger loading of the firmware and make the modem usable. Note that gobi_loader requires firmware images which can't be freely redistributed. See http://www.codon.org.uk/~mjg59/gobi_loader for more information.
*** Bug 600361 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Hi there. Here are my comments on your package: 1. SRPM spec file differs from standalone spec file (File in SRPM misses the disttag) 2. BuildRoot, %clean and rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT (in %install) can be removed (unless you want to get this package into EPEL too) 3. The upstream makefile ignores the $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. It should be patched to correctly set the compiler flags.
Thank you for you comments. I will address.
(In reply to comment #2) > 1. SRPM spec file differs from standalone spec file (File in SRPM misses the > disttag) Corrected. Must have copied an older copy of the spec file out by accident. > 2. BuildRoot, %clean and rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT (in %install) can be removed > (unless you want to get this package into EPEL too) It doesn't hurt and we may do an EPEL package, so I'll let it stay for now. > 3. The upstream makefile ignores the $RPM_OPT_FLAGS. It should be patched to > correctly set the compiler flags. Should be fixed here: ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader.spec ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader-0.7-3.fc15.src.rpm Once again, thank you for your contribution.
What's the status on this? I use a Gobi 2000 based device as my primary Internet connection and I'd really like to see this included in Fedora.
(In reply to comment #5) > What's the status on this? I use a Gobi 2000 based device as my primary > Internet connection and I'd really like to see this included in Fedora. Still waiting for review.
(In reply to comment #4) > ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader.spec > ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader-0.7-3.fc15.src.rpm Can you please upload the files again? Thanks
(In reply to comment #7) > (In reply to comment #4) > > ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader.spec > > ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader-0.7-3.fc15.src.rpm > > Can you please upload the files again? Thanks Should be there now. My FTP server was offline for a while. Sorry.
Rebuild not possible: <snip> + unset DISPLAY + make -j4 CFLAGS="-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic" gcc gobi_loader.c -o gobi_loader /bin/sh: gcc: command not found make: *** [gobi_loader] Error 127 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.i00mh9 (%build) <snap/>
Please ignore comment 9.
- rpmlint says (beside some irrelevant warnings): $ rpmlint gobi_loader* [...] gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. - The README file must be included.
(In reply to comment #11) > - rpmlint says (beside some irrelevant warnings): > > $ rpmlint gobi_loader* > [...] > gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources > 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings. > > - The README file must be included. Thanks. New files, which include README, here: ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader.spec ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader-0.7-4.fc17.src.rpm
Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== C/C++ ==== [x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: MUST Package contains no static executables. [x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. ==== Generic ==== [x]: EXTRA Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: EXTRA Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [-]: MUST Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: MUST Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 [-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [-]: 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 is included in %doc. [x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2)" For detailed output of licensecheck see file: /home/fab/reviews/736163-gobi_loader/licensecheck.txt [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package is named using only allowed ascii characters. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: MUST If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Package is not relocatable. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: MUST Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: MUST Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [!]: SHOULD Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 [!]: SHOULD Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL5 [-]: SHOULD 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]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [x]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged. [-]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SHOULD SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [-]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. Issues: [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions [!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5 See: None Rpmlint ------- Checking: gobi_loader-0.7-4.fc17.x86_64.rpm gobi_loader-debuginfo-0.7-4.fc17.x86_64.rpm gobi_loader-0.7-4.fc17.src.rpm gobi_loader.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gobi -> Gobi, gob, obi gobi_loader.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US chipsets -> chip sets, chip-sets, Chiclets gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) gobi -> Gobi, gob, obi gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gobi -> Gobi, gob, obi gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources gobi_loader.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gobi -> Gobi, gob, obi gobi_loader.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US chipsets -> chip sets, chip-sets, Chiclets gobi_loader.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US udev -> dude 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint gobi_loader-debuginfo gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) gobi -> Gobi, gob, obi gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gobi -> Gobi, gob, obi gobi_loader-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- gobi_loader-0.7-4.fc17.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) gobi_loader-debuginfo-0.7-4.fc17.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- gobi_loader-0.7-4.fc17.x86_64.rpm: gobi_loader = 0.7-4.fc17 gobi_loader(x86-64) = 0.7-4.fc17 gobi_loader-debuginfo-0.7-4.fc17.x86_64.rpm: gobi_loader-debuginfo = 0.7-4.fc17 gobi_loader-debuginfo(x86-64) = 0.7-4.fc17 MD5-sum check ------------- http://www.codon.org.uk/~mjg59/gobi_loader/download/gobi_loader-0.7.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 78bdc255451cde1caa406e146b01a88828480c9c43272de8cffdb61627be754a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 78bdc255451cde1caa406e146b01a88828480c9c43272de8cffdb61627be754a Generated by fedora-review 0.2.2 (9f8c0e5) last change: 2012-08-09 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 736163 Some additional comments: - You are mixing macro and variable style. - If you don't plan to include the package in EPEL, please removed the obsolete stuff.
Thank you for your review. New files are here: ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader.spec ftp://ftp.rexursive.com/pub/gobi_loader/gobi_loader-0.7-5.fc17.src.rpm I have no plans to package this for EPEL5, so the old cruft has been removed. Hope the rest checks out too.
Package APPROVED.
(In reply to comment #15) > Package APPROVED. Thank you kindly for your time.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: gobi_loader Short Description: Firmware loader for Qualcomm Gobi WWAN devices Owners: bojan Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
gobi_loader-0.7-5.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gobi_loader-0.7-5.fc18
gobi_loader-0.7-5.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gobi_loader-0.7-5.fc17
gobi_loader-0.7-5.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository.
gobi_loader-0.7-6.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.