3:26 p.m.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2254855
Ben Beasley <code(a)musicinmybrain.net> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Ben Beasley <code(a)musicinmybrain.net> ---
Oops, I thought I already approved this!
Everything looks fine here, and the package is APPROVED. The review text below
contains some commentary, but does not suggest any changes.
Package Review
==============
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
The spec file is almost the same as the output of rust2rpm, which simplifies
the review. I noted the following changes:
- The current version is 0.0.5, but the packaged version is 0.0.4. This is
justified because rust-jiter is packaged as a dependency for
python-pydantic-core, which pins version 0.0.4.
https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-core/blob/82158ce5a69c9c9d7e749c1348...
Furthermore, the dependency version will be updated in a future pydantic-core
release (https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-core/pull/1092), but the PR is
not simple enough to be an obvious candidate for backporting to the current
release.
If another dependent package appears before pydantic-core supports 0.0.5, it
may be necessary to create a compat package. For now, packaging 0.0.4 is
appropriate.
- The patch drop-lexical-core-dependency.patch drops an unnecessary dependency.
It appears reasonable, corresponds to an upstream PR, and is properly
documented/justified.
- An unnecessary benchmarking dev dependency is removed using tomcli. This is a
good idea, and it’s clearly appropriate for it to be downstream-only.
Issues:
=======
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice:
/usr/share/cargo/registry/jiter-0.0.4/LICENSE
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_duplicate_files
This is due to rust2rpm listing the entire %{crate_instdir}/ and then
separately listing some of its contents as %license. The duplication appears
to be harmless; if it is a problem, then it should be fixed in rust2rpm.
===== MUST items =====
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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License". 32 files have
unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/ben/Downloads/review/2254855-rust-jiter/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %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
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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).
[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 %license.
[x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in rust-
jiter-devel , rust-jiter+default-devel , rust-jiter+python-devel
[x]: Package functions as described.
(tests pass)
[!]: Latest version is packaged.
OK: justified by pinned pydantic-core dependency, which will be updated in
a future pydantic-core release
(https://github.com/pydantic/pydantic-core/pull/1092). See further
commentary at the top of the review.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=110523701
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic:
[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: rust-jiter-devel-0.0.4-1.fc40.noarch.rpm
rust-jiter+default-devel-0.0.4-1.fc40.noarch.rpm
rust-jiter+python-devel-0.0.4-1.fc40.noarch.rpm
rust-jiter-0.0.4-1.fc40.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.4.0
configuration:
/usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp9jnaqsjm')]
checks: 31, packages: 4
rust-jiter+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-jiter+python-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken
0.2 s
Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
/usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
/etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 3
rust-jiter+python-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Iterable',
'Summary(en_US)
Iterable -> Alterable, Tolerable, Iterate')
rust-jiter+python-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Iterable', '%description
-l
en_US Iterable -> Alterable, Tolerable, Iterate')
rust-jiter-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Iterable', 'Summary(en_US)
Iterable -> Alterable, Tolerable, Iterate')
rust-jiter-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Iterable', '%description -l
en_US
Iterable -> Alterable, Tolerable, Iterate')
rust-jiter+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Iterable',
'Summary(en_US)
Iterable -> Alterable, Tolerable, Iterate')
rust-jiter+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Iterable', '%description
-l en_US Iterable -> Alterable, Tolerable, Iterate')
rust-jiter+python-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-jiter+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 2 warnings, 13 filtered, 6
badness; has taken 0.1 s
Source checksums
----------------
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/jiter/0.0.4/download#/jiter-0.0.4.crate :
CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package :
b27d419c535bf7b50ad355278b1159cbf0cc8d507ea003d625b17bf0375720b8
CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
b27d419c535bf7b50ad355278b1159cbf0cc8d507ea003d625b17bf0375720b8
Requires
--------
rust-jiter-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
(crate(ahash/default) >= 0.8.0 with crate(ahash/default) < 0.9.0~)
(crate(num-bigint/default) >= 0.4.4 with crate(num-bigint/default) <
0.5.0~)
(crate(num-traits/default) >= 0.2.16 with crate(num-traits/default) <
0.3.0~)
(crate(smallvec/default) >= 1.11.0 with crate(smallvec/default) < 2.0.0~)
/usr/bin/python3
cargo
rust-jiter+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
cargo
crate(jiter)
rust-jiter+python-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
(crate(pyo3/default) >= 0.20.0 with crate(pyo3/default) < 0.21.0~)
(crate(pyo3/num-bigint) >= 0.20.0 with crate(pyo3/num-bigint) < 0.21.0~)
cargo
crate(jiter)
Provides
--------
rust-jiter-devel:
crate(jiter)
rust-jiter-devel
rust-jiter+default-devel:
crate(jiter/default)
rust-jiter+default-devel
rust-jiter+python-devel:
crate(jiter/python)
rust-jiter+python-devel
Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2254855
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: R, Ocaml, Java, Python, PHP, fonts, Perl, C/C++,
SugarActivity, Haskell
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2254855
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...