Spec URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2.spec SRPM URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2-2.7.1-2.fc18.src.rpm Description: CTPP or CT Plus Plus is a tool separating data processing (business logic) from data presentation. CTPP is a suitable choice for projects where a programmer and an HTML designer are different people. The goal of CTPP development was to achieve maximum performance with minimal basic functionality that is easily expandable. In other words, any conceivable capabilities can be added by writing users functions. Fedora Account System Username:ndroftheline
Please note that this library is a dependency of another package I will be submitting shortly called Kiwix, an offline Wikipedia reading application. See kiwix.org for details on that program. I am currently working on changing Kiwix' build system to use the system-wide headers and libraries.
Fails to build from source on x86_64: ... + mv /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ctpp2-2.7.1-2.fc16.x86_64/usr/man /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ctpp2-2.7.1-2.fc16.x86_64//usr/share/man + mkdir /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ctpp2-2.7.1-2.fc16.x86_64/usr/lib64 mkdir: cannot create directory `/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/ctpp2-2.7.1-2.fc16.x86_64/usr/lib64': File exists
Just remove the whole if clause, everything is working fine without it. Don't ship the static library (.a). Either delete it or don't build it in the first place. # skipped RPATH due to build errors, also following upstream's spec example -- That comment is misleading. It's part of our guidelines not to allow rpaths, refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath. Just drop it. Please be more specific about the manfiles, the headers and also the name of the library. Doing that, you'll notice, the manpages are installed in the wrong place: /usr/share/man/man/man1/ctpp2-config.1.gz should be /usr/share/man/man1/ctpp2-config.1.gz. Don't ship INSTALL. I'd suggest to not use the version macro in Patch0. You'd have to rename a fitting patch on every update.
> Just remove the whole if clause, everything is working fine without it. Fixed. > Don't ship the static library (.a). Either delete it or don't build it in > the first place. Fixed. With cmake, how can I avoid building it in the first place? Is there something like --disable-static for cmake? A quick google didn't show anything promising... > # skipped RPATH due to build errors, also following upstream's spec example > -- That comment is misleading. It's part of our guidelines not to allow > rpaths, refer to > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath. Just > drop it. Fixed. > Please be more specific about the manfiles, the headers and also the name of > the library. Doing that, you'll notice, the manpages are installed in the > wrong place: /usr/share/man/man/man1/ctpp2-config.1.gz should be > /usr/share/man/man1/ctpp2-config.1.gz. Fixed, so long as I am now being specific enough in the %%files sections. > Don't ship INSTALL. Fixed. I will avoid that in the future. Sorry. > I'd suggest to not use the version macro in Patch0. You'd have to rename a > fitting patch on every update. Fixed. New URLs: Spec URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2.spec SRPM URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2-2.7.1-3.fc18.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #4) > > Don't ship the static library (.a). Either delete it or don't build it in > > the first place. > > Fixed. With cmake, how can I avoid building it in the first place? Is there > something like --disable-static for cmake? A quick google didn't show > anything promising... No, but removing lines 438 to 440 in CMakeLists.txt would achieve that.
- Please package the latest version, which is 2.8.3 - ctpp2-config must go into the devel sub-package - The build doesn't respect Fedora's compiler flags Cosmetics: Remove the empty %doc macro Package Review ============== Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [-]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. Tried on PPC and ARM [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/makerpm/954182-ctpp2/licensecheck.txt There's one header that states GPL or Artistic, but it's only intended for Windows and not included here (include/CTPP2Time.h) [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [-]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 10 files. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: 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]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: 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]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. 2.8.3 is current! [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Uses parallel make. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: ctpp2-2.7.1-3.fc20.x86_64.rpm ctpp2-devel-2.7.1-3.fc20.x86_64.rpm ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xyntax -> syntax, Pentax ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US canbe -> cane, canoe, can be ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gzip -> zip, grip, g zip ctpp2.x86_64: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-28 ctpp2.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/ctpp2-config ctpp2-devel.x86_64: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-28 ctpp2-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint ctpp2 ctpp2-devel ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xyntax -> syntax, Pentax ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US canbe -> cane, canoe, can be ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gzip -> zip, grip, g zip ctpp2.x86_64: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-28 ctpp2.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/ctpp2-config ctpp2-devel.x86_64: E: changelog-time-in-future 2013-04-28 ctpp2-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 5 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- ctpp2 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10()(64bit) libcrypto.so.10(libcrypto.so.10)(64bit) libctpp2.so.2()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) ctpp2-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ctpp2(x86-64) libctpp2.so.2()(64bit) Provides -------- ctpp2: ctpp2 ctpp2(x86-64) libctpp2.so.2()(64bit) ctpp2-devel: ctpp2-devel ctpp2-devel(x86-64) MD5-sum check ------------- http://ctpp.havoc.ru/download/ctpp2-2.7.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 9ff78816b69ea68f94f6fe4310b0eeb92c424e4ce15104064435cc3e017603df CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 9ff78816b69ea68f94f6fe4310b0eeb92c424e4ce15104064435cc3e017603df Generated by fedora-review 0.4.0 (660ce56) last change: 2013-01-29 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 954182
Oh, and please correct the spelling errors xyntax and canbe!
> - ctpp2-config must go into the devel sub-package Fixed. > Remove the empty %doc macro Fixed. > [!]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. Fixed. > [?]: Package functions as described. It may take some time for the package this relies on, Kiwix, to be packaged. It requires some upstream work to allow using system-wide libs and headers. > [!]: Latest version is packaged. Fixed > ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xyntax -> syntax, > Pentax > ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US canbe -> cane, canoe, > can be > ctpp2.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gzip -> zip, grip, g > zip Fixed. > ctpp2.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/ctpp2-config Fixed. New URLS: Spec URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2.spec SRPM URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2-2.8.3-1.fc18.src.rpm
Build fails with RPATH issues and the compiler flags are not used. I'll try to help you solving it later.
Emailed upstream regarding putting newest version on their English-language homepage.
New URLS: Spec URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2.spec SRPM URL: http://multiseatlibrary.distract.org/files/ctpp2-2.8.3-2.fc18.src.rpm Thank you Volker for all you help!
I stumbled on this review because I was looking into what was required to build kiwix on Fedora. The URL for the spec appears to be dead. As per the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews#Reviewer_not_responding stalled reviews policy, please respond if you're still interested in the review within the next month or so (and reupload the spec) and I'll be glad to review the package for you or take over the submission.
I think we can close this.