https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
Bug ID: 1741582 Summary: Review Request: mingw-libpsl - MinGW port of C library for the Publix Suffix List Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fidencio@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://fidencio.fedorapeople.org/mingw-libpsl/mingw-libpsl.spec SRPM URL: https://fidencio.fedorapeople.org/mingw-libpsl/ Description: MinGW port of C library for the Publix Suffix List Fedora Account System Username: fidencio
Context: I'm adding mingw-libpsl as libpsl is a dependency of libsoup. The final goal is to be able to update mingw-libsoup.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
Fabiano Fidêncio fidencio@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1741575
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741575 [Bug 1741575] Review Request: mingw-libunistring - MinGW port of GNU Unicode string library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
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 need to add %?mingw_package_header in the header and %{?mingw_debug_package} before %prep https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/MinGW/#_stripping
- You need BR:
BuildRequires: mingw32-filesystem BuildRequires: mingw64-filesystem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- - Use %mingw_make %{?_smp_mflags}
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- 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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License", "FSF Unlimited License (with Retention)", "GPL (v3 or later)", "FSF Unlimited License (with Retention) GNU General Public License (v2)", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License". 2225 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/mingw-libpsl/review- mingw-libpsl/licensecheck.txt [x]: 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. [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]: 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 4 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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
===== 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 mingw32-libpsl , mingw64-libpsl [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. Note: mingw32-libpsl : /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys- root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/libpsl.pc mingw64-libpsl : /usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/pkgconfig/libpsl.pc [-]: 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 all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
--- Comment #4 from Fabiano Fidêncio fidencio@redhat.com --- Both spec and srpm have been updated according to the reviewer comments.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
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 #5 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- Package approved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2019-29cb74dec4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-29cb74dec4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
--- Comment #6 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mingw-libpsl
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-libpsl-0.21.0-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 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-2019-29cb74dec4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2019-09-15 00:27:04
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- mingw-libpsl-0.21.0-1.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741582 Bug 1741582 depends on bug 1741575, which changed state.
Bug 1741575 Summary: Review Request: mingw-libunistring - MinGW port of GNU Unicode string library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1741575
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org