[Bug 2039193] New: Review Request: perl-HTML-Gumbo - HTML5 parser based on gumbo C library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
Bug ID: 2039193 Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-Gumbo - HTML5 parser based on gumbo C library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: rc040203@freenet.de QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-HTML-Gumbo.spec SRPM URL: https://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-HTML-Gumbo-0.18-2.fc36.src.r... Description: Gumbo is an implementation of the HTML5 parsing algorithm implemented as a pure C99 library with no outside dependencies. Fedora Account System Username: corsepiu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1858048
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1858048 [Bug 1858048] rt-5.0.2 is available
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Depends On| |2016587
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016587 [Bug 2016587] Review Request: perl-Alien-LibGumbo - Gumbo parser library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193 Bug 2039193 depends on bug 2016587, which changed state.
Bug 2016587 Summary: Review Request: perl-Alien-LibGumbo - Gumbo parser library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016587
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
Xavier Bachelot xavier@bachelot.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review? Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |xavier@bachelot.org CC| |xavier@bachelot.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
--- Comment #1 from Xavier Bachelot xavier@bachelot.org --- Missing BuildRequires: - perl-interpreter - perl-devel - gcc - perl(strict) - perl(warnings)
rpmlint warnings: perl-HTML-Gumbo.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/HTML/Gumbo/Gumbo.bs perl-HTML-Gumbo-debuginfo.x86_64: E: shared-library-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/HTML/Gumbo/Gumbo.so-0.18-2.fc36.x86_64.debug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
--- Comment #2 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de --- Next update:
Spec URL: https://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-HTML-Gumbo.spec SRPM URL: https://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-HTML-Gumbo-0.18-3.fc36.src.r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
--- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de --- Ping? Would somebody please continue this review?
This is the last package missing to be able to ship rt5 with Fedora 36.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
--- Comment #4 from Xavier Bachelot xavier@bachelot.org --- Seems almost good.
The following rpmlint warning has not been fixed: - perl-HTML-Gumbo.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/HTML/Gumbo/Gumbo.bs Please drop the file with something like: find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name '*.bs' -empty -delete and add a BuildRequires: findutils
There's also a new warning: - perl-HTML-Gumbo.spec:10: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 10) There's another spurious tab at line 21.
Sorry for the delay.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
--- Comment #5 from Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de --- (In reply to Xavier Bachelot from comment #4)
Seems almost good.
The following rpmlint warning has not been fixed:
- perl-HTML-Gumbo.x86_64: E: zero-length
/usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/HTML/Gumbo/Gumbo.bs Please drop the file with something like: find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name '*.bs' -empty -delete and add a BuildRequires: findutils
Da***d, I already had fixed this in the last update, but apparently I had uploaded an older rpm.
Next try: Spec URL: https://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-HTML-Gumbo.spec SRPM URL: https://corsepiu.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-HTML-Gumbo-0.18-4.fc37.src.r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
--- Comment #6 from Xavier Bachelot xavier@bachelot.org --- rpmlint is now clean. Missing BR: findutils, please fix.
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [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.
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", "The Perl 5 License GNU General Public License, Version 1". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/2039193-perl-HTML-Gumbo/licensecheck.txt [-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/HTML(perl-HTML-Parser, perl-HTML-Escape, perl-HTML-Strip, perl-HTML-Template-Pro), /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/HTML(perl-HTML-Parser, perl-HTML- Escape, perl-HTML-Strip, perl-HTML-Template-Pro) [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. [-]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 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 must own all directories that it creates. [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 must not depend on deprecated() packages. [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
Perl: [x]: CPAN urls should be non-versioned.
===== 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). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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 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.
Rpmlint ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Unversioned so-files -------------------- perl-HTML-Gumbo: /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/HTML/Gumbo/Gumbo.so
Source checksums ---------------- https://cpan.metacpan.org/authors/id/R/RU/RUZ/HTML-Gumbo-0.18.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : bf50b61c24656cc3fc958602d80a9c7d017247af38d8dbfa0e9dec5b75425d5f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : bf50b61c24656cc3fc958602d80a9c7d017247af38d8dbfa0e9dec5b75425d5f
Requires -------- perl-HTML-Gumbo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgumbo.so.1()(64bit) perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.34.0) perl(:VERSION) perl(Alien::LibGumbo) perl(XSLoader) perl(strict) perl(warnings) rtld(GNU_HASH)
perl-HTML-Gumbo-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
perl-HTML-Gumbo-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides -------- perl-HTML-Gumbo: perl(HTML::Gumbo) perl-HTML-Gumbo perl-HTML-Gumbo(x86-64)
perl-HTML-Gumbo-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) perl-HTML-Gumbo-debuginfo perl-HTML-Gumbo-debuginfo(x86-64)
perl-HTML-Gumbo-debugsource: perl-HTML-Gumbo-debugsource perl-HTML-Gumbo-debugsource(x86-64)
Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2039193 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Perl, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Python, SugarActivity, Java, R, Haskell, C/C++, fonts, PHP, Ocaml Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
Xavier Bachelot xavier@bachelot.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Xavier Bachelot xavier@bachelot.org --- Package approved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2039193
Ralf Corsepius rc040203@freenet.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Last Closed| |2022-03-01 10:57:36
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com