https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1413474 Filip Szymański <fszymanski(a)onet.pl&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fszymanski(a)onet.pl --- Comment #1 from Filip Szymański <fszymanski(a)onet.pl&gt; --- See: https://github.com/clalancette/pycdlib/pull/2 -- 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=1413474 --- Comment #3 from Chris Lalancette <clalancette(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to Filip Szymański from comment #2) Ah, I didn't realize that was the case. OK, I'll take that part of the patch then. Thanks. Hm, OK. When I enabled those parts of the RPM, I got some errors: Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.wD5Kvc + umask 022 + cd /home/clalancette/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd pycdlib-1.1.0 + PYTHONPATH=/home/clalancette/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/python-pycdlib-1.1.0-0.20170201000812git7204e8b.fc25.x86_64/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages + py.test-2.7 -v ============================= test session starts ============================== platform linux2 -- Python 2.7.13, pytest-2.9.2, py-1.4.32, pluggy-0.3.1 -- /usr/bin/python2 cachedir: .cache rootdir: /home/clalancette/rpmbuild/BUILD/pycdlib-1.1.0, inifile: collected 0 items ========================= no tests ran in 0.02 seconds ========================= error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.wD5Kvc (%check) I'm on Fedora 25, x86_64. Any thoughts? Cool. Thanks for your work on this so far! -- 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=1413474 --- Comment #5 from Chris Lalancette <clalancette(a)gmail.com&gt; --- All right, I've now done another upstream release (1.1.0), and updated the SPEC, SRPM, and RPMs accordingly. I also tried building them in mock this time to make sure I got all of the BuildRequires, and indeed, I found one more: syslinux. So I think this should be ready to go, they are available here: Spec URL: https://clalance.fedorapeople.org/python-pycdlib.spec SRPM URL: https://clalance.fedorapeople.org/python-pycdlib-1.1.0-1.fc25.src.rpm Please give them another review when you have a chance. Thanks! -- 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=1413474 --- Comment #7 from Chris Lalancette <clalancette(a)gmail.com&gt; --- It's odd that it doesn't match the upstream sha256 sum, since I created the release just for this review. I'll take a look and see what happened there. By the way, pycdlib already supports python3, and this package actually exports both a python2-pycdlib and a python3-pycdlib. So we are good there. Thanks for the review! -- 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=1413474 --- Comment #9 from VincentS <vincent(a)casperlefantom.net&gt; --- Ok, I checked, now they match: sha256sum pycdlib-1.1.0.tar.gz rpmbuild/SOURCES/pycdlib-1.1.0.tar.gz ae0d2aa92dbb40849666f4bcdd9b2c89f1c4e38cdd42bcb9a89a9e9aab8f14f6 pycdlib-1.1.0.tar.gz ae0d2aa92dbb40849666f4bcdd9b2c89f1c4e38cdd42bcb9a89a9e9aab8f14f6 rpmbuild/SOURCES/pycdlib-1.1.0.tar.gz Sorry, it's true, there is already Python3 support. Your package seems ok for me. PS: Please pay attention to the files versions. -- 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=1413474 --- Comment #10 from Julien Enselme <jujens(a)jujens.eu&gt; --- - Missing requires: python3-sendfile on the Python 3 package - Are the tools python2 only? - Missing COPYING in the tools subpackage - I believe RPM lints errors are false positive due to this change: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/python3_c.utf-8_locale Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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: "LGPL (v2.1)", "Unknown or generated". 27 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/1413474-python- pycdlib/licensecheck.txt [!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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. [-]: 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. [!]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 10 files. [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]: 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [X]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [X]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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 python2-pycdlib , python3-pycdlib , pycdlib-tools [?]: Package functions as described. [X]: Latest version is packaged. [X]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-pycdlib-1.1.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm python3-pycdlib-1.1.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm pycdlib-tools-1.1.0-1.fc27.noarch.rpm python-pycdlib-1.1.0-1.fc27.src.rpm python-pycdlib.src: E: specfile-error Python runtime initialized with LC_CTYPE=C (a locale with default ASCII encoding), which may cause Unicode compatibility problems. Using C.UTF-8, C.utf8, or UTF-8 (if available) as alternative Unicode-compatible locales is recommended. python-pycdlib.src: E: specfile-error Python runtime initialized with LC_CTYPE=C (a locale with default ASCII encoding), which may cause Unicode compatibility problems. Using C.UTF-8, C.utf8, or UTF-8 (if available) as alternative Unicode-compatible locales is recommended. 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Requires -------- python2-pycdlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python2-pysendfile pycdlib-tools (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python2-matplotlib python2-networkx python2-pycdlib python3-pycdlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python2-pycdlib: python-pycdlib python2-pycdlib python2.7dist(pycdlib) python2dist(pycdlib) pycdlib-tools: pycdlib-tools python3-pycdlib: python3-pycdlib python3.6dist(pycdlib) python3dist(pycdlib) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/clalancette/pycdlib/archive/v1.1.0/pycdlib-1.1.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ae0d2aa92dbb40849666f4bcdd9b2c89f1c4e38cdd42bcb9a89a9e9aab8f14f6 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ae0d2aa92dbb40849666f4bcdd9b2c89f1c4e38cdd42bcb9a89a9e9aab8f14f6 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1413474 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 -- 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=1413474 --- Comment #12 from Julien Enselme <jujens(a)jujens.eu&gt; --- I think you should be more precise in your %files section and transform %{python3_sitelib}/* into %{python3_sitelib}/%{srcname}/ and add %{python3_sitelib}/%{srcname}-%{version}-py%{python3-version}.egg-info/ You should do the same for python 2. I didn't pay attention to that during my initial review. -- 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=1413474 Julien Enselme <jujens(a)jujens.eu&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #14 from Julien Enselme <jujens(a)jujens.eu&gt; --- Looks good. Approved. -- 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=1413474 --- Comment #16 from Gwyn Ciesla <limburgher(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-pycdlib -- 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=1413474 Julien Enselme <jujens(a)jujens.eu&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #18 from Julien Enselme <jujens(a)jujens.eu&gt; --- I think you can. - Check it works ok for other repo - Send a mail to devel to explain your problem. -- 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=1413474 Chris Lalancette <clalancette(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed| |2018-08-09 13:36:30 -- 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