https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags| |fedora-review? Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |ngompa13(a)gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Taking this 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=2049379

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 --- Comment #3 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- The directory structure is wrong here. This needs to be "%{_libdir}/cmake/aws-c-common" instead of "%{_libdir}/aws-c-common/cmake". The CMake dependency generator isn't picking up anything and CMake can't use the modules unless it's in the right directory structure. -- 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=2049379

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 Kyle Knapp <kyleknap(a)amazon.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kyleknap(a)amazon.com --- Comment #4 from Kyle Knapp <kyleknap(a)amazon.com&gt; --- Thanks Neal! I created a PR in the repository where David and I are developing the specfiles right now: https://github.com/davdunc/awscli-2-rpm/pull/30. It should have addressed all of the feedback and David will send a new link to the updated specfile and srpm. It looks like most of this feedback is applicable to the other aws-c-* modules so we will make sure to update those. I did have one question about the cmake configs comment. When I was building all of the aws-c-* modules together (i.e. using rpmbuild or mock), cmake seemed to be able to successfully locate and build against the various aws-c-* modules even though they used the path %{_libdir}/<name>/cmake/ for installing their configs. Even in the cmake documentation: https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/command/find_package.html#config-mode..., it seems to indicate that cmake should be able to find the configs under %{_libdir}/<name>/cmake/. What commands/steps do you need to run to tell that the %{_libdir}/<name>/cmake pattern is not working correctly? Or is it more for consistency that all cmake config files need to be under %{_libdir}/cmake/? I added a patch so that the library does install it in the %{_libdir}/cmake/aws-c-common path, and we will have to add similar patches to the rest of the aws-c-* modules. So I'm trying to fully understand it before making those updates. -- 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=2049379

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 --- Comment #6 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to Kyle Knapp from comment #4) The issue is that the dependency generator can't find %{_libdir}/*/cmake modules, only %{_libdir}/cmake/* modules. And depending on how CMake is configured, it may not be able to find %{_libdir}/*/cmake modules (though it does by default). -- 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=2049379

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 David Duncan <davdunc(a)amazon.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(ngompa13(a)gmail.co | |m) -- 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=2049379

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(ngompa13(a)gmail.co | |m) | --- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [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. [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", "Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "BSD (3 clause) Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* Public domain". 235 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ngompa/2049379-aws-c- common/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/include/aws/common/posix, /usr/lib64/cmake/aws-c-common/shared, /usr/include/aws/testing, /usr/include/aws/common, /usr/lib64/cmake/aws-c-common [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/include/aws/common, /usr/lib64/cmake/aws-c-common, /usr/lib64/cmake/aws-c-common/shared, /usr/include/aws, /usr/include/aws/testing, /usr/include/aws/common/posix [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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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 20480 bytes in 1 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 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]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [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]: 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in aws-c- common-libs , aws-c-common-devel [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [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. [-]: 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]: 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 debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: aws-c-common-libs-0.6.14-4.fc36.x86_64.rpm aws-c-common-devel-0.6.14-4.fc36.x86_64.rpm aws-c-common-debugsource-0.6.14-4.fc36.x86_64.rpm aws-c-common-0.6.14-4.fc36.src.rpm aws-c-common-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation aws-c-common.src: W: strange-permission aws-c-common-cmake.patch 755 aws-c-common.src: W: strange-permission aws-c-common.spec 755 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: aws-c-common-libs-debuginfo-0.6.14-4.fc36.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/awslabs/aws-c-common/archive/v0.6.14/aws-c-common-0.6.... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1691c9dad5a0d236c2a0e351cc972231b176947e454c61d1c4b3ea4ab42f32e7 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1691c9dad5a0d236c2a0e351cc972231b176947e454c61d1c4b3ea4ab42f32e7 Requires -------- aws-c-common-libs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) aws-c-common-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): aws-c-common-libs(x86-64) cmake-filesystem(x86-64) libaws-c-common.so.1()(64bit) aws-c-common-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- aws-c-common-libs: aws-c-common-libs aws-c-common-libs(x86-64) libaws-c-common.so.1()(64bit) aws-c-common-devel: aws-c-common-devel aws-c-common-devel(x86-64) cmake(aws-c-common) aws-c-common-debugsource: aws-c-common-debugsource aws-c-common-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2049379 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: PHP, Python, SugarActivity, fonts, Ocaml, Perl, R, Haskell, Java Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 --- Comment #11 from Kyle Knapp <kyleknap(a)amazon.com&gt; --- Below are the new SPEC and SRPM based on the feedback related to needing to specify the directories that get created: SPEC: https://kyleknap-fedora.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/aws-c-common.spec SRPM: https://kyleknap-fedora.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/aws-c-common-0.6.14-5.... It should be set for another look. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379 --- Comment #13 from Gwyn Ciesla <gwync(a)protonmail.com&gt; --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/aws-c-common -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2049379