Spec URL: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/download/rpm/pcp-gui/pcp-gui.spec SRPM URL: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/download/rpm/pcp-gui/pcp-gui-1.5.1-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: pcp-gui provides Visualization tools for the Performance Co-Pilot (PCP) toolkit PCP provides a framework and services to support system-level performance monitoring and performance management. The PCP GUI package primarily includes visualization tools for monitoring systems using live and archived PCP sources. These tools have dependencies on graphics libraries which may or may not be installed on server machines, so PCP GUI is delivered, managed and maintained as a separate (source and binary) package to the core PCP infrastructure. Review Notes: The license in the spec is currently: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and Qwt I'm checking on the inclusion of "Qwt" and will update this BZ once known. This license currently fails rpmlint scrutiny. The pcp-gui package requires the base package (pcp) at run-time and the pcp-libs-devel package for build. For further background reading, the PCP home page is http://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp Note there is no pcp-gui-devel package and currently no plans for that.
License in the spec updated from "GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and Qwt" to "GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ with exceptions". This is a triple licensed open source package. For reference : The QWT license is described at http://qwt.sourceforge.net/qwtlicense.html and is "LGPLv2+ with exceptions" according to information in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main Regards -- Mark
FAIL MUST: rpmlint, tested on F15 x86-64 build: [root@very]~/rpmbuild# rpmlint SRPMS/pcp-gui-1.5.1-1.fc15.src.rpm [1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [[root@very]~/rpmbuild# rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/pcp-* [pcp-gui.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /usr/share/man/man1 [pcp-gui.x86_64: E: standard-dir-owned-by-package /var/lib [pcp-gui.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/libexec/pcp/bin/pmsnap [pcp-gui-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/pcp-gui-1.5.1/src/chart/main.cpp [pcp-gui-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/pcp-gui-1.5.1/src/chart/pmchart.cpp [pcp-gui-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/pcp-gui-1.5.1/src/chart/namespace.cpp [3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 0 warnings. PASS MUST: The spec file name must match the base package. FAIL MUST: No gross violations of Packaging:Guidelines seen. Minor stuff: run desktop-file-install on pmchart.desktop. PASS MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license PASS MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. (COPYING file includes all licenses). PASS MUST: [License file included in %doc] PASS MUST: The spec file must be written in American English PASS MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible PASS MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source PASS MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms PASS MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture -- none found PASS MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, PASS MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly -- package not i18n'd PASS MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files -- none PASS MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. PASS MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact PASS MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. PASS MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. PASS MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly -- no gross errors seen PASS MUST: MUST: Each package must consistently use macros -- minimal use PASS MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content PASS MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. NB: it's named pcp-doc rather than pcp-gui-doc. PASS MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. -- apparently PASS MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package -- none PASS MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. PASS MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1) -> -devel -- none PASS MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require [...] - none PASS MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool FAIL MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, Package's pmchart.desktop needs to be desktop-file-install'd FAIL MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. Same as rpmlint errors at top. PASS MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. OK SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) [...] OK SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations -- n/a KO SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock -- tested on f15 native system only KO SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures OK SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. -- smoke-tested OK SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane -- no scriptlets OK SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency NB: pcp-gui & pcp-doc subpackage not mutually required OK SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends -- none OK SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside -- no /file dependencies OK SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts -- includes 8 man pages in main package Bottom line, looks good except for rpmlint errors, and missing desktop-file-install.
Thanks for the review Frank. I've fixed all but one of the rpmlint complaints in the Fedora spec directly (will upload the new spec, srpms and binary RPMs soon, and update this BZ). These now all pass rpmlint with no errors. The one fix that needed a source change has been posted upstream, see http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/pcp/2011-November/002000.html and ack'd here: http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/pcp/2011-November/002001.html so this fix will be in the next pcp-gui release. Cheers -- Mark
Spec URL: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/download/rpm/pcp-gui/pcp-gui.spec SRPM URL: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/download/rpm/pcp-gui/pcp-gui-1.5.1-2.fc15.src.rpm New binary RPM packages: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/pcp/download/rpm/pcp-gui/Latest These are built from my pcp-gui dev branch (just waiting for the commits to be pulled into the main dev tree, after which we'll need to merge to master and do a release before committing to Fedora). -- Mark
Mark, those ftp:// URLs don't happen to resolve for me, but http:// do. In the new spec file, I don't see desktop-file-install, just a desktop-file-validate call. Is that intentional?
Frank, hmm, those ftp URLs should resolve - are you using a proxy or something? Works for me. Regarding desktop-file-install: desktop-file-validate can be used instead under certain circumstances (which seemed to apply in this case), as per : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage I can change it if you want - have to respin anyway once nathan pulls in the copyright changes. BTW, pcp needs the same batch of copyright changes too, which I'll take care of asap. Regards -- Mark
In that case, glad to conclude this review, conditional on those copyright trivialities being settled.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: pcp-gui Short Description: Visualization tools for the Performance Co-Pilot toolkit Owners: mgoodwin Branches: f15 f16 el6 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: pcp-gui New Branches: el5 Owners: mgoodwin InitialCC: pcp-gui branch also needed for el5 please. Note: pcp-gui does not build for el4.
pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.el6
pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.fc15
pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.el5
pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.fc16
pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository.
pcp-gui-1.5.2-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc15
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc16
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.el5
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc17
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.el6
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
pcp-gui-1.5.5-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.