https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Bug ID: 2120661 Summary: Review Request: dnf5 - package management library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nsella@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/main/dnf5.spe... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf... Description: DNF5 is a command-line package manager that automates the process of installing, upgrading, configuring, and removing computer programs in a consistent manner. It supports RPM packages, modulemd modules, and comps groups & environments. Fedora Account System Username: rpmsoftwaremanagement
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #1 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- The linked .spec file doesn't appear to match up with the linked SRPM file. Please make sure they correspond to each other.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #2 from nsella@redhat.com --- Hi, here's an updated link. SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf...
A note: the .spec file was slightly different due to our automation used to build nightly. Since it fetches the .spec file directly upstream I didn't think about the possibility of it being different. Sorry about it, should be good now.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |msuchy@redhat.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |msuchy@redhat.com
--- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- Taking. I do some preliminary checks and give Nicola comments in a video call.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #4 from Nicola Sella nsella@redhat.com --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- [ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins, /usr/lib64/libdnf5 [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/dbus-1/system- services, /usr/share/polkit-1/actions, /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins, /usr/share/dbus-1/interfaces, /usr/share/polkit-1, /etc/dbus-1, /usr/lib64/libdnf5, /usr/share/dbus-1, /etc/dbus-1/system.d
You either should own these directories or require some package that owns them.
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. Note: openssl1.1-devel is deprecated, you must not depend on it. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/deprecating-packages/
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/lib/python3.11/site- packages/libdnf_plugins/README See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_duplicate_files
This is caused by
%{python3_sitelib}/libdnf_plugins/ %doc %{python3_sitelib}/libdnf_plugins/README
because REDAME is the only file in this directory, just put %dir there. I.e.:
%dir %{python3_sitelib}/libdnf_plugins/ %doc %{python3_sitelib}/libdnf_plugins/README
Several Summary fields ends with dot. Summary should not end with dot. Summary should start with capital character. E.g., dnf5-plugin start with lowercase.
/etc/dnf/dnf5-aliases.d/README should be marked as %doc
I am worried about rpmlint error dnf5-debuginfo.x86_64: E: missing-PT_GNU_STACK-section /usr/lib/debug/.dwz/dnf5-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64 but I have no idea what it means.
This as well dnf5daemon-server.x86_64: E: dbus-policy-allow-without-destination <allow send_interface="org.rpm.dnf.v0"/> /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.rpm.dnf.v0.conf dnf5daemon-server.x86_64: E: dbus-policy-allow-without-destination <allow send_interface="org.rpm.dnf.v0"/> /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.rpm.dnf.v0.conf
Unversioned so-files -------------------- perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/base/base.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/common/common.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/comps/comps.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/conf/conf.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/logger/logger.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/plugin/plugin.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/rpm/rpm.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/transaction/transaction.so perl5-libdnf5-cli: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5_cli/progressbar/progressbar.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_base.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_common.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_comps.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_conf.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_logger.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_plugin.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_repo.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_rpm.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_transaction.so python3-libdnf5-cli: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5_cli/_progressbar.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/base.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/common.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/comps.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/conf.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/logger.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/plugin.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/repo.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/rpm.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/transaction.so ruby-libdnf5-cli: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5_cli/progressbar.so libdnf5-plugin-actions: /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins/actions.so python3-libdnf5-python-plugins-loader: /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins/python_plugins_loader.so dnf5-plugins: /usr/lib64/dnf5/plugins/builddep_cmd_plugin.so dnf5-plugins: /usr/lib64/dnf5/plugins/changelog_cmd_plugin.so
See https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7553184/how-to-do-versioning-of-shared-l... This is something you should really do. This will also likely fix bunch or rpmlint errors perl5-libdnf5.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so ....
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ppisar@redhat.com
--- Comment #6 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com --- (In reply to Miroslav Suchý from comment #5)
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. Note: openssl1.1-devel is deprecated, you must not depend on it. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/deprecating-packages/
This package does not depend on openssl-1.1-devel:
# rpm -qa | grep openssl openssl-libs-3.0.5-5.fc38.x86_64 openssl-3.0.5-5.fc38.x86_64 openssl-devel-3.0.5-5.fc38.x86_64 # dnf --repoid=f38-build builddep ~test/rpmbuild/SPECS/dnf5.spec [...] ======================================================================================================= Installing: bash-completion noarch 1:2.11-8.fc37 f38-build 291 k cppunit-devel x86_64 1.15.1-7.fc37 f38-build 57 k doxygen x86_64 2:1.9.5-2.fc38 f38-build 4.7 M fmt-devel x86_64 9.1.0-1.fc38 f38-build 123 k gpgme-devel x86_64 1.17.0-4.fc37 f38-build 165 k libcomps-devel x86_64 0.1.18-4.fc37 f38-build 28 k librepo-devel x86_64 1.14.4-1.fc38 f38-build 34 k libsmartcols-devel x86_64 2.38.1-2.fc38 f38-build 14 k python3-breathe noarch 4.34.0-3.fc37 f38-build 241 k python3-sphinx_rtd_theme noarch 1.0.0-8.fc37 f38-build 69 k ruby-devel x86_64 3.1.2-169.fc38 f38-build 419 k rubygem-test-unit noarch 3.5.3-202.fc37 f38-build 79 k sdbus-cpp-devel x86_64 1.2.0-1.fc38 f38-build 32 k sqlite-devel x86_64 3.39.3-2.fc38 f38-build 143 k toml11-devel x86_64 3.7.1-2.fc37 f38-build 83 k zchunk-devel x86_64 1.2.3-1.fc38 f38-build 15 k Installing dependencies: clang-libs x86_64 15.0.0-3.fc38 f38-build 21 M clang-resource-filesystem x86_64 15.0.0-3.fc38 f38-build 13 k cppunit x86_64 1.15.1-7.fc37 f38-build 138 k fmt x86_64 9.1.0-1.fc38 f38-build 118 k fontawesome-fonts noarch 1:4.7.0-14.fc37 f38-build 204 k google-roboto-slab-fonts noarch 1.100263-0.18.20150923git.fc37 f38-build 239 k lato-fonts noarch 2.015-14.fc37 f38-build 3.1 M libassuan-devel x86_64 2.5.5-5.fc37 f38-build 62 k ruby x86_64 3.1.2-169.fc38 f38-build 41 k ruby-default-gems noarch 3.1.2-169.fc38 f38-build 31 k ruby-libs x86_64 3.1.2-169.fc38 f38-build 3.2 M rubygem-io-console x86_64 0.5.11-169.fc38 f38-build 26 k rubygem-power_assert noarch 2.0.1-201.fc37 f38-build 19 k rubygem-psych x86_64 4.0.3-169.fc38 f38-build 51 k rubygems noarch 3.3.22-201.fc38 f38-build 311 k rubypick noarch 1.1.1-17.fc37 f38-build 9.9 k sdbus-cpp x86_64 1.2.0-1.fc38 f38-build 98 k systemd-devel x86_64 251.5-607.fc38 f38-build 459 k
Transaction Summary =======================================================================================================
I guess a tool you used for this review does take into account that "pkgconfig(libcrypto)", which is indeed build-required, is provided by multiple OpenSSL packages:
# dnf --quiet --enablerepo=f38-build repoquery --whatprovides 'pkgconfig(libcrypto)' openssl-devel-1:3.0.5-5.fc38.i686 openssl-devel-1:3.0.5-5.fc38.x86_64 openssl1.1-devel-1:1.1.1q-2.fc37.i686 openssl1.1-devel-1:1.1.1q-2.fc37.x86_64
perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/base/base.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/common/common.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/comps/comps.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/conf/conf.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/logger/logger.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/plugin/plugin.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/rpm/rpm.so perl5-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/transaction/transaction.so perl5-libdnf5-cli: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5_cli/progressbar/progressbar.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_base.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_common.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_comps.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_conf.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_logger.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_plugin.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_repo.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_rpm.so python3-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5/_transaction.so python3-libdnf5-cli: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/libdnf5_cli/_progressbar.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/base.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/common.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/comps.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/conf.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/logger.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/plugin.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/repo.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/rpm.so ruby-libdnf5: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5/transaction.so ruby-libdnf5-cli: /usr/lib64/ruby/vendor_ruby/libdnf5_cli/progressbar.so
These files are fine. All of them are plugins. Their respective language interpreters indeed expect file names without a soname version. Compare to other Perl, Pyhon, and Ruby packages.
libdnf5-plugin-actions: /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins/actions.so python3-libdnf5-python-plugins-loader: /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins/python_plugins_loader.so
dnf5-plugins: /usr/lib64/dnf5/plugins/builddep_cmd_plugin.so dnf5-plugins: /usr/lib64/dnf5/plugins/changelog_cmd_plugin.so
None of these libraries need to be versions. Only libraries which are in a standard dynamic linker path (see /etc/ld.so.conf) need to be versioned.
perl5-libdnf5.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so ....
We need to see which exact symbol is missing.
Maybe the object was not linked to libperl.so (missing -lperl from LDFLAGS). Though it would be only a cosmetic fix because the only code which loads Perl extensions is libperl.so. Hence always implicitly loaded.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #7 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com --- (In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #6)
(In reply to Miroslav Suchý from comment #5)
perl5-libdnf5.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so ....
We need to see which exact symbol is missing.
# ldd -d -r /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1 [...] libcrypt.so.2 => /lib64/libcrypt.so.2 (0x00007f8729d3e000) undefined symbol: PL_thr_key (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_2bool_flags (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_more_sv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newRV (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_call_method (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_markstack_grow (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_2nv_flags (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_croak_nocontext (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_setsv_flags (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_bless (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_free_tmps (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_gv_init_pvn (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_2pv_flags (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_get_sv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_newmortal (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_setref_pv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_mg_get (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_2uv_flags (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newSVsv_flags (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_pop_scope (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newSVuv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newSViv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_isobject (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_hv_common_key_len (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_free2 (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newSV (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_magic (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newSVpvn (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_setiv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_setpvn (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newRV_noinc (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_gv_add_by_type (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_savetmps (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_stack_grow (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_setpvf_nocontext (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newXS (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_setpv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_av_make (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_hv_common (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_av_len (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_2mortal (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_more_bodies (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_newSVnv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_2iv_flags (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_av_fetch (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_gv_stashpv (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_mg_find (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_push_scope (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_derived_from (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1) undefined symbol: Perl_sv_backoff (/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1)
It's missing -lperl:
$ scanelf -n redhat-linux-build/bindings/perl5/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so TYPE NEEDED FILE ET_DYN libdnf5.so.1,libstdc++.so.6,libfmt.so.9,libgcc_s.so.1,libc.so.6 redhat-linux-build/bindings/perl5/auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so
From a build log:
/usr/bin/g++ -fPIC -O2 -flto=auto -ffat-lto-objects -fexceptions -g -grecord-gcc-switches -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -fstack-protector-strong -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -fcf-protection -Wl,--enable-new-dtags -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-z,now -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -Wl,--build-id=sha1 -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-z,now -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -Wl,--build-id=sha1 -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes -shared -Wl,-soname,repo.so.1 -o ../auto/libdnf5/repo/repo.so.1 CMakeFiles/perl5_repo.dir/CMakeFiles/perl5_repo.dir/repoPERL_wrap.cxx.o -Wl,-rpath,/home/test/rpmbuild/BUILD/dnf5-5.0.0/redhat-linux-build/libdnf: ../../../libdnf/libdnf5.so.1 -ldl -lstdc++fs -lstdc++ -lfmt -ljson-c -lmodulemd -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -lsolv -lsolvext -lrpm -lrpmio -lpopt -lxml2 -lgpgme -lrepo -lglib-2.0 -lsolv -lsolvext -lrpm -lrpmio -lpopt -lxml2 -lgpgme -lrepo -lsqlite3
(Now something actually sets a dummy soname to "repo.so.1" and it breaks the Perl loader: perl -e 'require libdnf5::repo': Can't locate loadable object for module libdnf5::common. It searches for libdnf5/common.so.)
Upstream Perl does not link extensions to libperl. Fedora as well as some other distributions patch Perl build systems to do it. Swig probably was missed. (The problem is that upstream Perl does not have a configuration option to save -lperl linker flag to.) I'd guess it's not a big deal.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #8 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com --- From Perl packaging point of view the package names are wrong. perl5-libdnf5 should be called perl-libdnf5. I.e. without the digit 5 after perl.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #9 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com --- And Perl packages are missing an explicit dependency on perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_...) https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/#_versioned_module_compat_requires. Also the /usr/share/licenses/perl5-libdnf5/lgpl-2.1.txt is not necessary because the same file is already packaged in libdnf5 which is required by the Perl packages.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #10 from Nicola Sella nsella@redhat.com --- Thank you, Petr. Here are the updated links for specfile and srpm.
SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(ppisar@redhat.com | |)
--- Comment #11 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- [ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/dbus-1, /etc/dbus-1, /usr/share/dbus-1/system-services, /usr/lib/.build-id/58, /etc/dbus-1/system.d
While /usr/lib/.build-id/58 is false negative, the other seems valid issues to me. All these are owned by dbus-common, which is transitively owned by dbus you require, but I think you should require directly dbus-common to be sure.
But beside this I see no other issues.
@ppisar@redhat.com do you have any additional comments? This is a big package, I may miss something.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #12 from Nicola Sella nsella@redhat.com ---
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/dbus-1, /etc/dbus-1, /usr/share/dbus-1/system-services, /usr/lib/.build-id/58, /etc/dbus-1/system.d
While /usr/lib/.build-id/58 is false negative, the other seems valid issues to me. All these are owned by dbus-common, which is transitively owned by dbus you require, but I think you should require directly dbus-common to be sure.
Directory with no ownership should be fixed. Your quoted request is addressed by this line [1] part of this commit [2]
[1] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/blob/main/dnf5.spec#L133 [2] https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf5/commit/4d9b0c1d76b3c7b326271...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(ppisar@redhat.com | |) |
--- Comment #13 from Petr Pisar ppisar@redhat.com --- Indeed the package large. Here are my comments for a rpmlint output:
dnf5.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dnf/dnf5-aliases.d/README This is Ok.
dnf5daemon-server.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.rpm.dnf.v0.conf FIX: This configures access permissions to the D-Bus service. I'm not familiar with D-Bus, but I believe the file should be marked with `%config(noreplace)'. It's clearly a configuration file which user may want to modify (e.g. add a permission to other users). And e.g. avahi package does the same.
dnf5.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dnf5 dnf5daemon-client.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dnf5daemon-client dnf5daemon-server.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dnf5daemon-server These are regressions in rpmlint (bug #2132936). Ok.
dnf5-plugins.x86_64: W: no-documentation Ok.
perl-libdnf5.x86_64: W: no-documentation perl-libdnf5-cli.x86_64: W: no-documentation python3-libdnf5.x86_64: W: no-documentation python3-libdnf5-cli.x86_64: W: no-documentation ruby-libdnf5.x86_64: W: no-documentation ruby-libdnf5-cli.x86_64: W: no-documentation Ok. TODO: Inform upstream that some documentation would be great. Upstream should consider adding a dummy documentation which point a reader to a C API documentation.
libdnf5.x86_64: E: missing-hash-section /usr/lib64/libdnf5.so.1 libdnf5-cli.x86_64: E: missing-hash-section /usr/lib64/libdnf-cli.so.1 This is a new test in rpmlint or a new feature of Fedora toolchain (removal of SystV hash section. There is still a GNU hash section). Ok.
dnf5-plugins.x86_64: W: description-shorter-than-summary TODO: The description could name packaged plugins. Once independent plugins appear, users will ask what's inside dnf5-plugins.
And here are my comments for the packaged files and dependencies:
$ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/dnf5-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /etc/dnf/dnf5-aliases.d -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 166 Oct 4 10:22 /etc/dnf/dnf5-aliases.d/README -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 960616 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/bin/dnf5 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/8e lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 24 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/8e/9303befb3457d311377cc4f2f8febd69256c19 -> ../../../../usr/bin/dnf5 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/lib/dnf5 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/lib/dnf5/aliases.d -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4315 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/lib/dnf5/aliases.d/compatibility.conf drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/lib64/dnf5 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/lib64/dnf5/plugins -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 131 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/lib64/dnf5/plugins/README drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/share/bash-completion drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/share/bash-completion/completions -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 265 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/bash-completion/completions/dnf5 drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 964 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5/COPYING.md -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18092 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5/gpl-2.0.txt -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 448 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/share/man/man8/dnf5.8.gz TODO: Section (8) of dnf5 manual page and location (/usr/bin) of the executable do not match. I recommend moving dnf5 manual to section #1 as the tool can be used by a regular user, e.g. for "dnf repoquery".
$ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libdnf5-plugin-actions-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/0c lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 48 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/0c/9d6e06e1ebda323152dff4e89f4c07967aca49 -> ../../../../usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins/actions.so drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 122112 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins/actions.so TODO: /usr/lib64/libdnf5/plugins is already owned by dnf5 package. While it's not against guidelines, I recommend you to choose only one package. Why it's not libfn5 package? Compare to dnf5-plugins which does not own the directory.
$ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/dnf5daemon-client-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 244304 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/bin/dnf5daemon-client drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/12 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 37 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/12/0c5e65bba93042bd48df606cb1a9f366d531c0 -> ../../../../usr/bin/dnf5daemon-client drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5daemon-client -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 964 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5daemon-client/COPYING.md -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18092 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5daemon-client/gpl-2.0.txt -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 469 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/share/man/man8/dnf5daemon-client.8.gz TODO: If provided dnf5daemon-client can be used by a regular user, I recommend moving the manual page to section 1. Otherwise the executable should be moved to /usr/sbin.
$ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/dnf5daemon-server-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 328 Oct 4 10:22 /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.rpm.dnf.v0.conf -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 378688 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/bin/dnf5daemon-server drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/91 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 37 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/lib/.build-id/91/d947cdee3d3dbf3359169273a2440a9af6dac7 -> ../../../../usr/bin/dnf5daemon-server -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 141 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/lib/systemd/system/dnf5daemon-server.service -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3727 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/dbus-1/interfaces/org.rpm.dnf.v0.Goal.xml -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2541 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/dbus-1/interfaces/org.rpm.dnf.v0.SessionManager.xml -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4059 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/dbus-1/interfaces/org.rpm.dnf.v0.rpm.Repo.xml -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10503 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/dbus-1/interfaces/org.rpm.dnf.v0.rpm.Rpm.xml -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 119 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/dbus-1/system-services/org.rpm.dnf.v0.service drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Oct 7 10:15 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5daemon-server -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 964 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5daemon-server/COPYING.md -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18092 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/licenses/dnf5daemon-server/gpl-2.0.txt -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3427 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/share/man/man8/dnf5daemon-dbus-api.8.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 469 Oct 7 10:14 /usr/share/man/man8/dnf5daemon-server.8.gz -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1509 Oct 4 10:22 /usr/share/polkit-1/actions/org.rpm.dnf.v0.policy FIX: Move dnf5daemon-server executable to /usr/sbin.
$ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/dnf5-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 dnf-data 1 libc.so.6()(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.32)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 1 libdnf-cli.so.1()(64bit) 1 libdnf5(x86-64) = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 libdnf5.so.1()(64bit) 1 libfmt.so.9()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) 1 libsmartcols.so.1()(64bit) 1 libsmartcols.so.1(SMARTCOLS_2.25)(64bit) 1 libsmartcols.so.1(SMARTCOLS_2.29)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.11)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.14)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.15)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.18)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.19)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.20)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.21)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.26)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.29)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.30)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 1 rpmlib(TildeInVersions) <= 4.10.0-1 1 rtld(GNU_HASH) 3 systemd The dependency on systemd is strange. I believe dnf5 binary package should be free of systemd. I have no idea why the dependency was generated here.
$ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/dnf5daemon-client-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 dnf5daemon-server 1 libc.so.6()(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 1 libdnf-cli.so.1()(64bit) 1 libdnf5(x86-64) = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 libdnf5-cli(x86-64) = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 libdnf5.so.1()(64bit) 1 libfmt.so.9()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) 1 libsdbus-c++.so.1()(64bit) 1 libsmartcols.so.1()(64bit) 1 libsmartcols.so.1(SMARTCOLS_2.25)(64bit) 1 libsmartcols.so.1(SMARTCOLS_2.29)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.11)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.20)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.21)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.22)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.26)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.29)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.30)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 1 rpmlib(TildeInVersions) <= 4.10.0-1 1 rtld(GNU_HASH) TODO: Can the client talk to dnf5daemon-server over network? If it can, it should not depend on dnf5daemon-server (multi-host scenario). Otherwise, I recommend constraining the dependency with exactly the same version-release.
$ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/dnf5daemon-server-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 3 /bin/sh 1 dbus 1 dnf-data 1 libc.so.6()(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.14)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.27)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.32)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 1 libdnf5(x86-64) = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 libdnf5-cli(x86-64) = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 libdnf5.so.1()(64bit) 1 libfmt.so.9()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) 1 libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) 1 libsdbus-c++.so.1()(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.11)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.18)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.19)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.20)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.21)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.22)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.26)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.29)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.30)(64bit) 1 libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.9)(64bit) 1 polkit 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 1 rpmlib(TildeInVersions) <= 4.10.0-1 1 rtld(GNU_HASH) TODO: If the 'dbus' dependency is for /etc/dbus-1/system.d directory, it should be 'dbus-common'. Fedora has (or had) multiple implementations of D-Bus.
$ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libdnf5-devel-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libdnf5-devel = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 libdnf5-devel(x86-64) = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 pkgconfig(libdnf) TODO: 'pkgconfig(libdnf)' should be versioned. Report upstream that the pkg-config file is missing a version field.
$ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/libdnf5-cli-devel-5.0.0-0~pre.fc38.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libdnf5-cli-devel = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 libdnf5-cli-devel(x86-64) = 5.0.0-0~pre.fc38 1 pkgconfig(libdnf-cli) TODO: 'pkgconfig(libdnf-cli)' should be versioned. Report upstream that the pkg-config file is missing a version field.
Otherwise, I cannot see any other problems.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |vondruch@redhat.com
--- Comment #14 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com --- I wish the package was named just `dnf` and the old DNF was renamed to `dnf4` instead.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Nicola Sella nsella@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(msuchy@redhat.com | |)
--- Comment #15 from Nicola Sella nsella@redhat.com ---
FIX: This configures access permissions to the D-Bus service. I'm not familiar with D-Bus, but I believe the file should be marked with `%config(noreplace)'. It's clearly a configuration file which user may want to modify (e.g. add a permission to other users). And e.g. avahi package does the same.
Fixed
FIX: Move dnf5daemon-server executable to /usr/sbin.
Fixed
Thank you for the feedback, I added the TODOs to future changes list while the FIXes were addressed now to land in Fedora. I believe that everything discussed as blocking has now been fixed and included.
SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf...
msuchy what's your opinion?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #16 from Nicola Sella nsella@redhat.com ---
TODO: Can the client talk to dnf5daemon-server over network? If it can, it should not depend on dnf5daemon-server (multi-host scenario). Otherwise, I recommend constraining the dependency with exactly the same version-release.
Dnf5daemon-client is incapable to talk to the server through network at the moment. The communication is handled through dbus.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #17 from Nicola Sella nsella@redhat.com --- Update:
The dependency on systemd is strange. I believe dnf5 binary package should be free of systemd. I have no idea why the dependency was generated here.
removed %{?systemd_requires}
TODO: The description could name packaged plugins. Once independent plugins appear, users will ask what's inside dnf5-plugins.
Updated with examples
SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rpmsoftwaremanagement/dnf...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(msuchy@redhat.com | |) |
--- Comment #18 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [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. 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [-]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /etc/dbus-1, /etc/dbus-1/system.d, /usr/share/dbus-1, /usr/share/dbus-1/system- services This is IMHO false positive. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/bash- completion.... /usr/include/libdnf/conf(libdnf-devel), /usr/include/libdnf/plugin(libdnf-devel), /usr/include/libdnf/utils(libdnf-devel) [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. Note: this is complicated. There is still ongoing discussion how the replacement should be done. I will not block review on this. [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. [x]: 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]: 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 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]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in dnf5daemon-server [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
Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
===== 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 libdnf5 , libdnf5-cli-devel , perl-libdnf5-cli , python3-libdnf5-cli , ruby- libdnf5-cli [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %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]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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.
APPROVED
Disclaimer: the upstream package is still under development and the package is huge. If I missed something during this review, then please open BZ and Nicola (who is part of the upstream) will fix it.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120661
--- Comment #19 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/dnf5
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com