Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |lemenkov@gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com 2012-04-28 05:09:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0)

rpmlint: $ rpmlint libccd.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/libccd-* libccd.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libccd.so.1.2 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 libccd-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

I'm looking into the exit() warning, but I don't know if it's a showstopper.

From my pov - this is a defect in the library's architecture but not a review

blocker.

For those who are not aware of this issue - it is considered as a good practice to return descriptive error values from the library in case of errors and not to die immediately (this should be up to the underlying application(s) how to behave in this sorrow situation).

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rc040203@freenet.de

--- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de 2012-05-01 00:11:07 EDT --- The exit doesn't bother me at all.

However, the static lib package does. Feel strongly encouraged not to build and ship the static library package.

Also, this package seems to contain a testsuite. Please consider activating it.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

--- Comment #5 from Rich Mattes richmattes@gmail.com --- Update to version 1.3:

Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/libccd/libccd.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/libccd/libccd-1.3-1.fc17.src.rpm

$ rpmlint libccd.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/libccd-* 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

The exit() call has been removed, and the buildsystem is now setting a SONAME.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

--- Comment #6 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de --- - Package does not build in mock: ... cc -g -Wall -pedantic --std=gnu99 -I./ -I../ -Icu/ -o test main.c common.o support.o vec3.o polytope.o boxbox.o spheresphere.o cylcyl.o boxcyl.o mpr_boxbox.o mpr_cylcyl.o mpr_boxcyl.o -L./ -Lcu/ -l /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lccd collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [test] Error 1 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.jqQs8y (%check)

- Package does not honor RPM_OPT_FLAGS: ... Building C object CMakeFiles/ccd_static.dir/src/ccd.c.o /usr/lib64/ccache/gcc -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic -O2 -g -I/builddir/build/BUILD/libccd-1.3/src -o CMakeFiles/ccd_static.dir/src/ccd.c.o -c /builddir/build/BUILD/libccd-1.3/src/ccd.c

Here, it accepts $RPM_OPT_FLAGS, but later overrides add "-O2 -g". I.e. it overrides some settings from $RPM_OPT_FLAGS.

Later on during the built, the testsuite doesn't honor RPM_OPT_LFLAGS at all: ... make[1]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/libccd-1.3/src/testsuites/cu' cc -g -Wall -pedantic -DCU_ENABLE_TIMER -c -o cu.o cu.c ar cr libcu.a cu.o ranlib libcu.a make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/libccd-1.3/src/testsuites/cu' cc -g -Wall -pedantic --std=gnu99 -I./ -I../ -Icu/ -c -o common.o common.c

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |martin.gieseking@uos.de

--- Comment #8 from Martin Gieseking martin.gieseking@uos.de --- Rich, are you still interested in this package? Your SRPM is unavailable at the moment.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) sanjay.ankur@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sanjay.ankur@gmail.com

--- Comment #10 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) sanjay.ankur@gmail.com --- Hi folks,

I'm interested in helping out with the Fedora Robotics SIG. If you folks don't mind, I could review this package for Rich?

If no one takes the review by Monday, 24th September, I'll take over the review :)

Thanks, Warm regards, Ankur

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

--- Comment #12 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) sanjay.ankur@gmail.com --- Hi,

Review:

[+] OK [-] NA [?] Issue

[+] Package meets naming and packaging guidelines [+] Spec file matches base package name. [+] Spec has consistant macro usage. [+] Meets Packaging Guidelines. [+] License [+] License field in spec matches [ankur@ankur libccd-1.3]$ !find find . -name "*" -exec licensecheck '{}' ; | sed '/UNKNOWN/ d' ./src/testsuites/cu/cu.c: LGPL (v3 or later) ./src/testsuites/cu/cu.h: LGPL (v3 or later) ./src/testsuites/cu/check-regressions: LGPL (v3 or later) ./src/testsuites/cu/cu.c: LGPL (v3 or later) ./src/testsuites/cu/cu.h: LGPL (v3 or later) ./BSD-LICENSE: BSD (3 clause) ./ccd.pc.in: *No copyright* GENERATED FILE

As you see, some of the tests are under the LGPL license. The License should be LGPLv3 and BSD?

[+] License file included in package [+] Spec in American English [+] Spec is legible. [+] Sources match upstream md5sum: [ankur@ankur SPECS]$ review-md5check.sh libccd.spec Getting http://libccd.danfis.cz/files/libccd-1.3.tar.gz to /tmp/review/libccd-1.3.tar.gz % Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed 100 127k 0 127k 0 0 16072 0 --:--:-- 0:00:08 --:--:-- 69374 2c4fcb78174ebf9441a1706961a669cd /tmp/review/libccd-1.3.tar.gz 2c4fcb78174ebf9441a1706961a669cd /home/ankur/rpmbuild/SOURCES/libccd-1.3.tar.gz removed `/tmp/review/libccd-1.3.tar.gz' removed directory: `/tmp/review' [ankur@ankur SPECS]$

[+] BuildRequires correct [+] Spec handles locales/find_lang [+] Package is code or permissible content. [+] Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

[+] Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. [+] Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun [+] .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig [+] .so files in -devel subpackage. [+] -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}

[+] Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. [+] Package has no duplicate files in %files. [+] Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. [+] Package owns all the directories it creates. [+] No rpmlint output. [ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint ./libccd-1.3-3.fc17.src.rpm ../SPECS/libccd.spec /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/*.rpm 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [ [+] final provides and requires are sane: == libccd-1.3-3.fc19.src.rpm == Provides:

Requires: cmake python valgrind

== libccd-1.3-3.fc19.x86_64.rpm == Provides: libccd = 1.3-3.fc19 libccd(x86-64) = 1.3-3.fc19 libccd.so.1()(64bit)

Requires: /sbin/ldconfig /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH)

== libccd-debuginfo-1.3-3.fc19.x86_64.rpm == Provides: libccd-debuginfo = 1.3-3.fc19 libccd-debuginfo(x86-64) = 1.3-3.fc19

Requires:

== libccd-devel-1.3-3.fc19.x86_64.rpm == Provides: libccd-devel = 1.3-3.fc19 libccd-devel(x86-64) = 1.3-3.fc19 pkgconfig(ccd) = 1.3

Requires: /usr/bin/pkg-config libccd(x86-64) = 1.3-3.fc19 libccd.so.1()(64bit)

[ankur@ankur result]$

SHOULD Items:

[+] Should build in mock. [-] Should build on all supported archs [-] Should function as described. [+] Should have sane scriptlets. [+] Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. [+] Should have dist tag [+] Should package latest version

Issues:

1. Please check the license

Everything else looks okay. Almost ready for approval too!

Thanks, Warm regards, Ankur

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) sanjay.ankur@gmail.com changed:

What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+

--- Comment #14 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) sanjay.ankur@gmail.com --- Hi Rich,

Great. Nothing to change then :)

XXX APPROVED XXX

Thanks, Warm regards, Ankur

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

--- Comment #16 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- libccd-1.4-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libccd-1.4-1.fc17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- libccd-1.4-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository.

Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=817193

--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- libccd-1.4-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.