[Bug 1560874] New: Review Request: OpenCoarrays - An open-source Fortran Coarrays implementation for gfortran
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
Bug ID: 1560874 Summary: Review Request: OpenCoarrays - An open-source Fortran Coarrays implementation for gfortran Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: susi.lehtola@iki.fi QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays.spec SRPM URL: https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays-2.0.0-1.fc27.src.rpm
Description: OpenCoarrays is an open-source software project that produces an application binary interface (ABI) used by the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) Fortran front-end to build executable programs that leverage the parallel programming features of the Fortran 2018 Draft International Standard.
Fedora Account System Username: jussilehtola
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
Zaak Beekman ibeekman@paratools.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ibeekman@paratools.com
--- Comment #1 from Zaak Beekman ibeekman@paratools.com --- Hi,
I'm an OpenCoarrays developer and handle most of the build system, CI, QA and testing stuff. We would like to work with you to help ensure that OpenCoarrays can be easily and correctly packaged for Fedora and hopefully, someday, RHEL. We are open to consider requests for changes/improvements to our (upstream) build system that might make RPM packaging easier, more maintainable, or more canonical. Please post any criticisms, suggestions, bugs or praise for the upstream package to https://github.com/sourceryinstitute/OpenCoarrays/issues/new so that we don't miss them and can try to improve our software and the end user experience.
Second, for a discussion of the test failure with MPICH, please see https://github.com/sourceryinstitute/OpenCoarrays/issues/522
I will try to monitor this page for updates, but if I don't respond, please try commenting on the appropriate issue page on GitHub (or create a new issue there) or ping the OpenCoarrays mailing list (low traffic) opencoarrays@googlegroups.com
Thanks, Zaak
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zebob.m@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- - Why do you remove the cmake info:
# Remove cmake files rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/cmake/opencoarrays
- One test fails:
Start 55: get-put-allocatable-comp 55/65 Test #55: get-put-allocatable-comp .............***Failed Required regular expression not found.Regex=[Test passed. ] 2.21 sec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #3 from Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola@iki.fi --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #2)
- Why do you remove the cmake info:
# Remove cmake files rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/cmake/opencoarrays
Because the CMake files are not helpful: they are dependent on the MPI package. At the very least they'd need to be placed in an MPI implementation specific directory. But, the modules shouldn't be necessary because everything is installed in the MPI standard directories, and the MPI environment module should bring everything into the path.
One test fails:
Start 55: get-put-allocatable-comp
55/65 Test #55: get-put-allocatable-comp .............***Failed Required regular expression not found.Regex=[Test passed. ] 2.21 sec
Which version of Fedora did you use? This is with OpenMPI right? This looks similar to the MPICH bug which fails in test 58!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- All reviews are done with Fedora rawhide.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #5 from Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola@iki.fi --- 2.1.0 has been released and fixes compile bugs seen before, but there are still failing tests on several architectures, see https://github.com/sourceryinstitute/OpenCoarrays/issues/523
https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays.spec https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays-2.1.0-1.fc28.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #6 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- (In reply to Susi Lehtola from comment #5)
2.1.0 has been released and fixes compile bugs seen before, but there are still failing tests on several architectures, see https://github.com/sourceryinstitute/OpenCoarrays/issues/523
https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays.spec https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays-2.1.0-1.fc28.src.rpm
2.2.0 has been released. With a bit of tweaks to your SPEC it passes tests and build successfully! Please update so we can finish this review.
Sadly, tests fail on s390x: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=29094179
Either ExcludeArch s390x or ignore the failing tests? I don't think upstream plan to devolve manpower for s390x.
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]: 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]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
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", "MIT/X11 (BSD like) BSD (3 clause)", "*No copyright* BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (3 clause)", "BSD (2 clause)", "BSD (3 clause) GPL (v2 or later)". 184 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/OpenCoarrays/review- OpenCoarrays/licensecheck.txt [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 [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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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 20480 bytes in 2 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 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]: 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in OpenCoarrays-devel , OpenCoarrays-openmpi , OpenCoarrays-openmpi-devel , OpenCoarrays-mpich , OpenCoarrays-mpich-devel , OpenCoarrays- debuginfo , OpenCoarrays-debugsource [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: 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. [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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [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: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: OpenCoarrays-2.2.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm OpenCoarrays-devel-2.2.0-1.fc29.noarch.rpm OpenCoarrays-openmpi-2.2.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm OpenCoarrays-openmpi-devel-2.2.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm OpenCoarrays-mpich-2.2.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm OpenCoarrays-mpich-devel-2.2.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm OpenCoarrays-debuginfo-2.2.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm OpenCoarrays-debugsource-2.2.0-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm OpenCoarrays-2.2.0-1.fc29.src.rpm OpenCoarrays.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) gfortran -> FORTRAN OpenCoarrays.x86_64: E: no-binary OpenCoarrays-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation OpenCoarrays-openmpi.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/openmpi/lib/libcaf_mpi.so.3 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 OpenCoarrays-openmpi.x86_64: W: no-documentation OpenCoarrays-openmpi-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib OpenCoarrays-openmpi-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation OpenCoarrays-mpich.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/mpich/lib/libcaf_mpi.so.3 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 OpenCoarrays-mpich.x86_64: W: no-documentation OpenCoarrays-mpich-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib OpenCoarrays-mpich-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation OpenCoarrays.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) gfortran -> FORTRAN 9 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 11 warnings.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #7 from Zaak Beekman ibeekman@paratools.com ---
2.2.0 has been released. With a bit of tweaks to your SPEC it passes tests and build >successfully! Please update so we can finish this review.
Thanks for your efforts!
Sadly, tests fail on s390x: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?%3EtaskID=29094179
As one of the maintainers of OpenCoarrays, I can confirm that we have no plans of supporting s390x at the moment.
Either ExcludeArch s390x or ignore the failing tests? I don't think upstream plan to >devolve manpower for s390x.
Please let us know if there is anything we can do upstream to make packaging for Fedora easier for you.
Many thanks once again, Zaak
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1617930
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1617930 [Bug 1617930] Review Request: ISO_Fortran_binding - Support for C/Fortran interoperability
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #8 from Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola@iki.fi --- Updated spec and srpm https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays.spec https://jussilehtola.fedorapeople.org/OpenCoarrays-2.2.0-1.fc28.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alias| |OpenCoarrays
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
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 #9 from Robert-André Mauchin zebob.m@gmail.com --- Package approved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #10 from Zaak Beekman ibeekman@paratools.com --- I Don't think that this depends on 1617930. I believe that they should be independent of each other. Why is this marked as a depens on?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On|1617930 | |(ISO_Fortran_binding) |
--- Comment #11 from Susi Lehtola susi.lehtola@iki.fi --- (In reply to Zaak Beekman from comment #10)
I Don't think that this depends on 1617930. I believe that they should be independent of each other. Why is this marked as a depens on?
Good point. I thought they were dependent since a summary reading of the 2.2.0 release notes stated that it had been stripped out. But apparently it's been deprecated.
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1617930 [Bug 1617930] Review Request: ISO_Fortran_binding - Support for C/Fortran interoperability
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1560874
--- Comment #12 from Gwyn Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/OpenCoarrays
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com