Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Bug ID: 876915 Summary: Review Request: erlang-emmap - Erlang mmap interface Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: lemenkov@gmail.com Type: ---
Spec URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-emmap.spec SRPM URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc19.src.rpm Description: This Erlang library provides a wrapper that allows you to memory map files into the Erlang memory space. Fedora Account System Username: peter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |848423
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |mario.blaettermann@gmail.co | |m Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mario.blaettermann@gmail.co | |m Alias| |erlang-emmap Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com --- Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4694218
$ rpmlint -i -v * erlang-emmap.i686: I: checking erlang-emmap.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) mmap -> map, m map, mamma The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
erlang-emmap.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0-0.1.gitd0ef891 ['0-0.1.git8725d46.fc19', '0-0.1.git8725d46'] The latest entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package.
erlang-emmap.i686: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap.src: I: checking erlang-emmap.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) mmap -> map, m map, mamma The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
erlang-emmap.src: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap.src: W: invalid-url Source0: krestenkrab-emmap-8725d46.tar.gz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
erlang-emmap.x86_64: I: checking erlang-emmap.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) mmap -> map, m map, mamma The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
erlang-emmap.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0-0.1.gitd0ef891 ['0-0.1.git8725d46.fc19', '0-0.1.git8725d46'] The latest entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package.
erlang-emmap.x86_64: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap-debuginfo.i686: I: checking erlang-emmap-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking erlang-emmap-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: krestenkrab-emmap-8725d46.tar.gz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
%global git_tag 8725d46
but:
* Tue Nov 13 2012 Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com - 0-0.1.gitd0ef891
It's the only issue worth to discuss.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #1)
%global git_tag 8725d46
but:
- Tue Nov 13 2012 Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com - 0-0.1.gitd0ef891
It's the only issue worth to discuss.
Ohh, sorry for that. Looks like a leftover from my previous experiments.
* http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-emmap.spec * http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc19.src.rpm
Also I added comments about patches.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? | Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com --- Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4713616
$ rpmlint -i -v * erlang-emmap.i686: I: checking erlang-emmap.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) mmap -> map, m map, mamma The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
erlang-emmap.i686: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap.src: I: checking erlang-emmap.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) mmap -> map, m map, mamma The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
erlang-emmap.src: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap.src: W: invalid-url Source0: krestenkrab-emmap-8725d46.tar.gz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
erlang-emmap.x86_64: I: checking erlang-emmap.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) mmap -> map, m map, mamma The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
erlang-emmap.x86_64: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap-debuginfo.i686: I: checking erlang-emmap-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking erlang-emmap-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url https://github.com/krestenkrab/emmap (timeout 10 seconds) erlang-emmap.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: krestenkrab-emmap-8725d46.tar.gz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
Nothing of interest anymore.
--------------------------------- key:
[+] OK [.] OK, not applicable [X] needs work ---------------------------------
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review. [+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. [+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. ASL 2.0 [+] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc. [+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it is used by the sources file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. $ sha256sum * f0a25e2deda7dc215524cc6348ef6037e7e22e89c0ca40a44e885c17d853f608 krestenkrab-emmap-8725d46.tar.gz f0a25e2deda7dc215524cc6348ef6037e7e22e89c0ca40a44e885c17d853f608 krestenkrab-emmap-8725d46.tar.gz.orig
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. [+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense. [.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden. [.] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. [.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. [+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. [+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations) [+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. [+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. [.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [.] MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. [.] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} [.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. [.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. [+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. [+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[.] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [.] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See Koji build above (which uses Mock anyway). [+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [.] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. [.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. [.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [.] SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. [.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. [.] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense.
----------------
PACKAGE APPROVED
----------------
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Thanks Mario!
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: erlang-emmap Short Description: Erlang mmap interface Owners: peter Branches: f17 f18 el6 InitialCC:
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |limburgher@gmail.com
--- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaettermann@gmail.com --- $ fedpkg clone erlang-emmap Klone nach 'erlang-emmap'... fatal: '/srv/git/rpms//erlang-emmap.git' does not appear to be a git repository fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly Could not execute clone: Command '['git', 'clone', 'ssh://mariobl@pkgs.fedoraproject.org/erlang-emmap']' returned non-zero exit status 128
According to the tag "fedora-cvs +" the Git repo actually should exist.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Fixed. Sorry, artifact of bad wifi on my end. :)
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #7 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #6)
Fixed. Sorry, artifact of bad wifi on my end. :)
Unfortunately there is still something wrong. I can't upload package via fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc19.src.rpm . It got stuck at
sulaco ~/work/FE/erlang-emmap (git::master): fedpkg import ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc19.src.rpm Uploading: 293cb625db449fb83ea1a649eabd546f krestenkrab-emmap-8725d46.tar.gz
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Can you fedpkg clone?
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #9 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #8)
Can you fedpkg clone?
Yes, I can. It got stuck during fedpkg import, at file uploading.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Ok, I've re-created the git repo, try it now.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc17
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc18
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.el6
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed| |2012-12-06 02:08:15
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.1.git8725d46.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #18 from Peter Lemenkov lemenkov@gmail.com --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: erlang-emmap New Branches: epel7 Owners: peter InitialCC: erlang-sig
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #19 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.11.git05ae1bb.el7 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 7. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-emmap-0-0.11.git05ae1bb.el7
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=876915
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |erlang-emmap-0-0.11.git05ae | |1bb.el7 Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE |ERRATA
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- erlang-emmap-0-0.11.git05ae1bb.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla