[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Stuart Campbell  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2020-08-15 01:51:05




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #22 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nexus


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #21 from Andy Mender  ---
Nice! Package approved!


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Andy Mender  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #20 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Spec URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus.spec
SRPM URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus-4.4.3-6.fc32.src.rpm
Description: NeXus is a common data format for neutron, x-ray, and muon
science. This
package provides tools and libraries for accessing these files.  The on disk
representation is based upon either HDF4, HDF5 or XML
Fedora Account System Username: sic


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #19 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Awesome, thank you - I will look into the fsf issue upstream.  I've added the
COPYING file into the devel package.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #18 from Andy Mender  ---
> For the COPYING file, I wasn't sure if the file had to be 'installed' (hence 
> the patch was to add that to CMake), but it looks like the %license macro 
> picks it up from the source/build.

If it's in the root of the source dir, using %license for license files and
%doc for documentation files will add these to the correct directories :).

> Wasn't sure how bad the first one is, but the second one is a false warning, 
> as muon is spelt correctly.

I think the first one is bogus as well. Don't worry about it.

Last things reported by rpmlint:

Rpmlint
---
[...]
nexus.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/nexus/COPYING
nexus-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
nexus-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/nexus/napi.h
nexus-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/nexus/napiu.h
[...]
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 8 warnings.

A rather minor item, but I would add the COPYING file to the -devel package as
well:
%files devel
%license COPYING

As for the "incorrect-fsf-address" errors, the guidelines recommend contacting
upstream:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address
I've personally never seen this before, but it's not a blocking issue either
way.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #16 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Thank you again.

For the COPYING file, I wasn't sure if the file had to be 'installed' (hence
the patch was to add that to CMake), but it looks like the %license macro picks
it up from the source/build. 

I think I've addressed everything, the only warnings I see with rpmlint are
now:

nexus.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C NeXus
nexus.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US muon -> mun, moon, mu on

Wasn't sure how bad the first one is, but the second one is a false warning, as
muon is spelt correctly.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #17 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Spec URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus.spec
SRPM URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus-4.4.3-5.fc32.src.rpm
Description: NeXus is a common data format for neutron, x-ray, and muon
science. This
package provides tools and libraries for accessing these files.  The on disk
representation is based upon either HDF4, HDF5 or XML
Fedora Account System Username: sic


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #15 from Andy Mender  ---
> - None of the CMake generated files are useful to ship - this can be changed 
> upstream and then should be included in the package.

Sounds good.

> I think there are changes that can be made upstream to clean up the package 
> longer term, which I will try and get included in the next upstream patch 
> release.

Fingers crossed!

A couple of remaining points highlighted by rpmlint:
Rpmlint
---
Checking: nexus-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
  nexus-devel-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
  nexus-tools-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
  nexus-debuginfo-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
  nexus-debugsource-4.4.3-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
  nexus-4.4.3-4.fc33.src.rpm
nexus.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C NeXus
nexus.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US muon -> mun, moon, mu on
nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXus.a
nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXus.so
nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXusCPP.a
nexus.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libNeXusCPP.so

The *.a static libs should go into a separate nexus-static package, but
preferably be removed from the buildroot entirely. Unversioned *.so files
should go into the -devel package. I think the problem in the spec file is here
(highlighted with <<):
%files
%license COPYING
%doc %{_datadir}/doc/NeXus/README.doc
%{_libdir}/libNeXus* << 

I inspected the final RPM and it does contain "versioned" SO files:
- libNeXus.so.1
- libNeXus.so.1.0.0
- libNeXusCPP.so.1
- libNeXusCPP.so.1.0.0
These can be captured in the following way:
%{_libdir}/libNeXus.so.1*
%{_libdir}/libNeXusCPP.so.1*

However, their versions don't match the package version sadly.

Your devel package should then explicitly catch the unversioned SO files:
%{_libdir}/libNeXus.so
%{_libdir}/libNeXusCPP.so

More info on devel and static subpackages:
- https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
-
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries

nexus.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/nexus/COPYING
nexus-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
nexus-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/nexus/napi.h
nexus-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/nexus/napiu.h

Not quite sure why rpmlint listed these, but here's the doc on the error:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address

nexus-tools.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libxml2

Not sure whether this is an actual issue. A quick google search shows that lib*
library discovery should be left to rpm itself and not be explicitly listed in
the SPEC file. Could you try building without it to see whether it still works?

[...]
nexus.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch3: nexus-add-license.patch
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 14 warnings.

I missed this one last time. Should this patch be applied or removed? I see the
main package already has a COPYING file listed with %license.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #14 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Spec URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus.spec
SRPM URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus-4.4.3-4.fc32.src.rpm
Description: NeXus is a common data format for neutron, x-ray, and muon
science. This
package provides tools and libraries for accessing these files.  The on disk
representation is based upon either HDF4, HDF5 or XML
Fedora Account System Username: sic


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #13 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Thank you very much for the review and helpful comments. 

- I have used the %{version} macro
- Changed the BuildRequires to use pkgconfig where I can (HDF4/5 do not seem to
have .pc files)
- None of the CMake generated files are useful to ship - this can be changed
upstream and then should be included in the package.
- Added the license file and (hopefully) made it clear for the nxdir tool being
MIT licensed. 
- removed ldconfig lines.

I think there are changes that can be made upstream to clean up the package
longer term, which I will try and get included in the next upstream patch
release.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #12 from Andy Mender  ---
Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=48423183

> License:LGPLv2+
> URL:http://www.nexusformat.org/
> Source0:https://github.com/nexusformat/code/archive/v4.4.3.tar.gz

- Use the %{version} macro in the Source0 tag.
- Either use an alias for the archive or try this url in your Source0 field:
https://github.com/nexusformat/code/archive/v4.4.3/code-v4.4.3.tar.gz
  With macros it would look like this:
 
https://github.com/nexusformat/code/archive/v%{version}/code-v%{version}.tar.gz

> BuildRequires:  hdf5-devel
> BuildRequires:  hdf-devel
> BuildRequires:  make
> BuildRequires:  mxml-devel

Check whether it's possible to replace the various -devel package BuildRequires
with "pkgconfig(foo)" like mentioned here:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/PkgConfigBuildRequires/
Inspect subpackages as well.

> %files devel
> %{_includedir}/nexus/
> %{_libdir}/pkgconfig/

- Does the cmake build generate cmake files? If so, these should also be
included in the -devel subpackage. They usually sit in a dir like
"%{_libdir}/cmake/%{name}/"
- The pkgconfig line should be more specific, otherwise you're covering the
entire pkgconfig dir.

> %files tools
> %{_bindir}/nxbrowse
> %{_bindir}/nxconvert
> %{_bindir}/nxdir
> %{_bindir}/nxsummary
> %{_bindir}/nxtranslate
> %{_bindir}/nxtraverse
> %doc %{_datadir}/doc/NeXus/programs/
> %{_mandir}/man1/

I would list the manpages explicitly. You can use wildcards, though.

> %post -p /sbin/ldconfig

> %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig

Calling ldconfig explicitly is no longer needed and these calls should be
removed.

Full review matrix below:

Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
  Note: /sbin/ldconfig called in nexus
  See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Removing_ldconfig_scriptlets
  Review: see earlier comment.
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_devel_packages
  Review: I think this is related to the "%{_libdir}/libNeXus*" line in the
  main package. SO files in main packages should have a version number. 
  Check above guidelines for reference.
- 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.
  Note: License file LICENSE is not marked as %license
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text
  Review: LICENSE file not included in the package, though available?
- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
  present.
  Note: Package has .a files: nexus. Illegal package name: nexus. Does not
  provide -static: nexus.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries
  Review: see the below rpmlint reports.


= 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.

Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
 Note: Using prebuilt packages
[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", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v2
 or later)", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License", "GPL
 (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "Expat License", "*No
 copyright* Expat License", "zlib/libpng license", "*No copyright* GNU
 Lesser General Public License (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2) (with
 incorrect FSF address)", "GNU Lesser General Public License (v3 or
 later)", "GNU Lesser General Public License", "GPL (v2)", "*No
 copyright* GPL (v2)". 347 files have unknown license. Detailed output
 of licensecheck in
 /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/nexus/nexus/licensecheck.txt
 Review: There is a single file under LGPLv3+
 code-4.4.3/applications/c-nxvalidate/NXxrotflat.nxdl.xml: GNU Lesser
General Public License (v3 or later)
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage 

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Stuart Campbell  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(stuart@stuartcamp |
   |bell.me)|



--- Comment #11 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Spec URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus.spec
SRPM URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus-4.4.3-3.fc32.src.rpm
Description: NeXus is a common data format for neutron, x-ray, and muon
science. This
package provides tools and libraries for accessing these files.  The on disk
representation is based upon either HDF4, HDF5 or XML
Fedora Account System Username: sic


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #9 from Andy Mender  ---
Stuart, any updates on this?


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Petr Pisar  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||ppi...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Andy Mender  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(stuart@stuartcamp
   ||bell.me)




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Andy Mender  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||andymenderu...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|andymenderu...@gmail.com




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Stuart Campbell  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(stuart@stuartcamp |
   |bell.me)|



--- Comment #8 from Stuart Campbell  ---
I will revisit and update the request shortly.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

needinfo canceled: [Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review

Stuart Campbell  has canceled Package Review
's request for Stuart Campbell
's needinfo:
Bug 1376511: Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #8 from Stuart Campbell  ---
I will revisit and update the request shortly.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Jared Wallace  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jared-wall...@us.ibm.com



--- Comment #6 from Jared Wallace  ---
(This is an unofficial review)

I'll throw some notes out first, but do also review the automated tool output
below, as it identified a large quantity of issues as well.

1) You can remove the line "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" from %install

2) You've got a small ton of rpmlint errors that will either need fixing or
explaining (ignore spelling issues unless it really is mispelled)

3) If you have questions about any of the issues listed below, let me know and
I'll try to help you solve them.


Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
  Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DevelPackages
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
  Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/doc/NeXus/README.doc
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles
- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
  present.
  Note: Package has .a files: nexus. Illegal package name: nexus. Does not
  provide -static: nexus.
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries
- ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
  Note: /sbin/ldconfig not called in nexus
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shared_Libraries
- 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.
  Note: License file LICENSE is not marked as %license
  See:
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[ ]: Package contains no static executables.
[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.

Generic:
[ ]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
 found: "GPL (v2) (with incorrect FSF address)", "*No copyright* GPL
 (v2)", "Unknown or generated", "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "LGPL (v2 or
 later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v2 or later) (with
 incorrect FSF address)", "*No copyright* LGPL (v2 or later) (with
 incorrect FSF address)", "GPL (v2)". 185 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/pkg-
 review/nexus/nexus/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
 /usr/lib64/pkgconfig(pkgconfig), /usr/share/man/man1(filesystem)
[ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[ ]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[ ]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[ ]: 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 81920 bytes in 13 files.
[ ]: 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]: Package requires other 

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #5 from Stuart Campbell  ---
I've updated with in response to the comments.

SPEC URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus.spec

SRPM URL: https://sic.fedorapeople.org/nexus/nexus-4.4.3-2.fc26.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt  ---
Drive-by comments. Not easy to review, not a full review. Needs some more work:


> Name:   nexus
> Summary:NeXus scientific data file format

This %summary could be improved, because so far it is for insiders only and
doesn't give a hint what is included in this package. Judging on the %files
section contents, this is a library-only package. No program, not tools, and
the %summary could mention that. Such as:

  Summary: Library for handling NeXus scientific data files

It's written in C++ and offers shared library APIs for C, C++ and Fortran it
seems. Offering all of them in a single package could be drawback because of
what is pulled in via implicit dependencies.

Also visit
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Shared_Libraries
and:
 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries


> License:LGPL

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text

Further, the -tools subpackage contains a GPLv2 license text as one of the
files in a %doc folder. This needs to be reflected in the "License" tag of that
package, and the %license macro ought to be used.

There is another "LICENSE" file included. Consider pointing the fedora-review
tool at this bugzilla ticket, since it automates many checks related to
licensing.


> Requires:   libgfortran
> Requires:   hdf5
> Requires:   hdf
> Requires:   mxml

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package


> %packagedevel
> Summary:Development files for %{name}
> Requires:   %{name} = %{version}-%{release}

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package


> %packagetools
> Requires:   %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
> Requires:   libxml2
> Requires:   readline

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package


> %install
> rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> %make_install

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Tags_and_Sections


> %files
> %doc %{_datadir}/doc/NeXus/README.doc
> %{_libdir}/libNeXus*
> %{_libdir}/nexus/

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership

Particularly
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UnownedDirectories
since directory /usr/share/doc/NeXus/ would not be included. Similar problem
for the -tools subpackage.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #3 from Stuart Campbell  ---
SPEC URL:
https://github.com/stuartcampbell/rpm-packages/blob/master/nexus/nexus.spec

SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/sic/science/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00453425-nexus/nexus-4.4.3-2.fc26.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #2 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Updated SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/sic/science/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/00453425-nexus/nexus-4.4.3-2.fc26.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511



--- Comment #1 from Stuart Campbell  ---
Link to scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15644519

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1376511] Review Request: nexus - NeXus scientific data file format

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1376511

Stuart Campbell  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)




Referenced Bugs:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841
[Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a
sponsor
-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org