https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zebob.m@gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- - You're missing %{?dist} in Release

- Doesn't this service require its own user and group?

- Don't use:

Requires(post): systemd Requires(preun): systemd Requires(postun): systemd

Use the provided macro instead:

%{?systemd_requires} BuildRequires: systemd

- Also building with vendored is a no go, you will need to unbundle each dependency in vendor. Yes, it's gonna be a big task. Use gofed to do most of the work.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

Kaushal kshlmster@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1545610

Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1545610 [Bug 1545610] Review Request: golang-github-cespare-xxhash - A Go implementation of the 64-bit xxHash algorithm (XXH64)

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

Kaushal kshlmster@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1545614

Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1545614 [Bug 1545614] Review Request: golang-github-justinas-alice - Painless middleware chaining for Go

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

--- Comment #3 from Kaushal kshlmster@gmail.com --- Spec: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/kshlm/glusterd2/fedora-27-x8... SRPM: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/kshlm/glusterd2/fedora-27-x8...

I've updated the spec to be based on the one generated by gofed, and opened review requests for the dependencies that were missing.

GlusterD2 does not build with the versions of dependencies already packaged in Fedora. I'm still trying to identify what all packages need to be updated.

The spec has been updated to support unbundled builds. But we still build with bundled dependencies by default as the current available packaged dependencies don't work. Once I can confirm that GD2 can build with the packaged dependencies, I'll change the default to unbundled.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |

Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553 Bug 1540553 depends on bug 1545610, which changed state.

Bug 1545610 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-cespare-xxhash - A Go implementation of the 64-bit xxHash algorithm (XXH64) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1545610

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553 Bug 1540553 depends on bug 1545621, which changed state.

Bug 1545621 Summary: Review Request: golang-github-rasky-go-xdr - Implements the XDR standard as specified in RFC 4506 in pure Google Go (Golang) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1545621

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

--- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- - This:

BuildRequires: golang >= 1.8.0

should be

BuildRequires: %{?go_compiler:compiler(go-compiler)}%{!?go_compiler:golang}

The minimum requirements is not useful since F26 is well over 1.8.0.

- glusterd2.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate ['/var/log/glusterd2']

log-files-without-logrotate: This package contains files in /var/log/ without adding logrotate configuration for them.

See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Logrotate_config_file

- %if 0%{?with_debug} %global _dwz_low_mem_die_limit 0 %else %global debug_package %{nil} %endif

with_debug is not defined anywhere. You should set it to 1 in order to strip the binaries.

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]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v3 or later)", "GPL (v3)", "Unknown or generated". 322 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/glusterd2/review-glusterd2/licensecheck.txt [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [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. [-]: 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. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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]: 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [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]: No %config files under /usr. [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). [?]: 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. [-]: %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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [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]: 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: glusterd2-4.0.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm glusterd2-4.0.0-1.fc29.src.rpm glusterd2.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.0.0 ['4.0.0-1.fc29', '4.0.0-1'] glusterd2.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/sbin/glustercli glusterd2.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/sbin/glusterd2 glusterd2.x86_64: W: no-documentation glusterd2.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/bash_completion.d/glustercli.sh glusterd2.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate ['/var/log/glusterd2'] glusterd2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary glustercli glusterd2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary glusterd2 glusterd2.x86_64: W: empty-%postun 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |zebob.m@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review+

--- Comment #7 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- Excellent, package approved.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

--- Comment #8 from Gwyn Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- (fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/glusterd2

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- glusterd2-4.1.0-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c93afb8c27

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1540553

Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA

--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- glusterd2-4.1.0-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c93afb8c27