[Bug 1097035] New: Review Request: ghc-HsSyck - Fast, lightweight YAML loader and dumper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
Bug ID: 1097035 Summary: Review Request: ghc-HsSyck - Fast, lightweight YAML loader and dumper Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: petersen@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-HsSyck.spec SRPM URL: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-HsSyck-0.52-2.fc20.src.rpm
Description: This is a simple YAML ('Yet Another Markup Language') processor, used by the Pugs project for handling data serialization; this can be useful for optimization and caching purposes.
This is an interface to the 'syck' C library for parsing and dumping YAML data. It lets you transform textual YAML data into an object of type 'YamlNode', and vice versa, fast.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
--- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6844420
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |haskell-devel@lists.fedorap | |roject.org Summary|Review Request: ghc-HsSyck |Review Request: ghc-HsSyck |- Fast, lightweight YAML |- Fast lightweight YAML |loader and dumper |loader and dumper Whiteboard| |Ready
--- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com --- This is needed to build jhc and ajhc (Haskell compilers).
http://packdeps.haskellers.com/reverse/HsSyck
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mathstuf@gmail.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|unspecified |low
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
Ben Boeckel mathstuf@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Ben Boeckel mathstuf@gmail.com --- Just have to talk to upstream about the MIT/BSD license mismatch.
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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/boeckb/misc/code/fedora/1097035-ghc- HsSyck/licensecheck.txt
The LICENSE file looks like MIT (Modern Style[1]), but is marked as BSD everywhere else (upstream and in the spec). Should contact upstream about this discrepency.
[1]https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:MIT#Modern_Style_with_sublicense
[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 [?]: 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. [?]: 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. [-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 215040 bytes in 18 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 %doc. [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]: 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 do not use a name that already exist [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: [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: 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. [-]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: 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. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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]: 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: ghc-HsSyck-0.52-2.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-HsSyck-devel-0.52-2.fc20.x86_64.rpm ghc-HsSyck-0.52-2.fc20.src.rpm ghc-HsSyck.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US syck -> suck, sick, sack ghc-HsSyck.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US versa -> avers, verse, verso ghc-HsSyck.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US syck -> suck, sick, sack ghc-HsSyck.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US versa -> avers, verse, verso 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint ghc-HsSyck ghc-HsSyck-devel ghc-HsSyck.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US syck -> suck, sick, sack ghc-HsSyck.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US versa -> avers, verse, verso 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires -------- ghc-HsSyck (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ghc(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57) ghc(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f) ghc(hashtables-1.0.1.8-5c2e4e88deafeef23cb7e760fce1f340) ghc(syb-0.4.0-c48d52f3188b986ddaa9dd9ae40072f8) ghc(utf8-string-0.3.7-26a8ed8ca48fe809983bde6faca943a9) libHSarray-0.4.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSbase-4.6.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSbytestring-0.10.0.2-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSdeepseq-1.3.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSghc-prim-0.3.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHShashable-1.1.2.5-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHShashtables-1.0.1.8-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSinteger-gmp-0.5.0.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSprimitive-0.5.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSsyb-0.4.0-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHStext-0.11.3.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSutf8-string-0.3.7-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libHSvector-0.10.0.1-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgmp.so.10()(64bit) libsyck.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH)
ghc-HsSyck-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh ghc(HsSyck-0.52-8183c6608a32ebe14c37919d0962ec72) ghc-HsSyck(x86-64) ghc-compiler ghc-devel(base-4.6.0.1-8aa5d403c45ea59dcd2c39f123e27d57) ghc-devel(bytestring-0.10.0.2-4f93248f75667c2c3321a7a6761b576f) ghc-devel(hashtables-1.0.1.8-5c2e4e88deafeef23cb7e760fce1f340) ghc-devel(syb-0.4.0-c48d52f3188b986ddaa9dd9ae40072f8) ghc-devel(utf8-string-0.3.7-26a8ed8ca48fe809983bde6faca943a9) syck-devel(x86-64)
Provides -------- ghc-HsSyck: ghc(HsSyck-0.52-8183c6608a32ebe14c37919d0962ec72) ghc-HsSyck ghc-HsSyck(x86-64) libHSHsSyck-0.52-ghc7.6.3.so()(64bit)
ghc-HsSyck-devel: ghc-HsSyck-devel ghc-HsSyck-devel(x86-64) ghc-HsSyck-static ghc-devel(HsSyck-0.52-8183c6608a32ebe14c37919d0962ec72)
Unversioned so-files -------------------- ghc-HsSyck: /usr/lib64/ghc-7.6.3/HsSyck-0.52/libHSHsSyck-0.52-ghc7.6.3.so
Source checksums ---------------- http://hackage.haskell.org/package/HsSyck-0.52/HsSyck-0.52.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6c73bcbf8dee55e8a76a8dc9835201a2f995fe1c5c67f255f3f55f60ea9aacc1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6c73bcbf8dee55e8a76a8dc9835201a2f995fe1c5c67f255f3f55f60ea9aacc1
Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1097035 Buildroot used: fedora-20-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Haskell, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
--- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com --- (In reply to Ben Boeckel from comment #3)
Just have to talk to upstream about the MIT/BSD license mismatch.
Thanks good catch. I filed https://github.com/audreyt/hssyck/issues/4.
I think for now we could probably assume MIT unless upstream indicates otherwise. So I could update the spec file to say MIT if we want to keep this moving.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
--- Comment #5 from Ben Boeckel mathstuf@gmail.com --- Well, upstream is unresponsive :( .
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
--- Comment #6 from Ben Boeckel mathstuf@gmail.com --- Upstream pinged.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
--- Comment #7 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com --- Okay upstream confirmed it is MIT, and kindly made a new release.
Spec: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-HsSyck/ghc-HsSyck.spec SRPM: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-HsSyck/ghc-HsSyck-0.53-1.fc21.s...
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9088279
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
--- Comment #8 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com --- F23 Rawhide seems broken: "/usr/bin/ld: -r and -shared may not be used together"
Here is a successful f22 build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9088354
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
--- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com --- (I can't get ajhc to build with recent ghc though.)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1097035
Jens Petersen petersen@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|mathstuf@gmail.com |nobody@fedoraproject.org
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com -
Red Hat Bugzilla