[Bug 1488384] Review Request: stlink - STM32 discovery line Linux programmer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488384

Vasiliy Glazov  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE
Last Closed||2017-10-18 09:10:28



-- 
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 1488384] Review Request: stlink - STM32 discovery line Linux programmer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488384

Ricky Elrod  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||rel...@redhat.com



--- Comment #6 from Ricky Elrod  ---
*** Bug 1225241 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
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 1488384] Review Request: stlink - STM32 discovery line Linux programmer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488384



--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/stlink

-- 
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 1488384] Review Request: stlink - STM32 discovery line Linux programmer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488384



--- Comment #4 from Vasiliy Glazov  ---
Thanks.

-- 
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 1488384] Review Request: stlink - STM32 discovery line Linux programmer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488384

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST
  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Okay, package accepted.

-- 
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 1488384] Review Request: stlink - STM32 discovery line Linux programmer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488384



--- Comment #2 from Vasiliy Glazov  ---
Spec URL:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/RussianFedora/stlink/master/stlink.spec
SRPM URL:
http://koji.russianfedora.pro/kojifiles/work/tasks/6836/56836/stlink-1.4.0-2.fc28.src.rpm

Source0 url corrected.
Desktop file added.
Static library removed, -DBUILD_STATIC_LIBS:BOOL=OFF not work.
appdata.xml not provided by upstream.

-- 
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 1488384] Review Request: stlink - STM32 discovery line Linux programmer

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1488384

Robert-André Mauchin  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||zebo...@gmail.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin  ---
Hello,

   - Instead of:

Source0:%{url}/archive/%{version}.tar.gz#/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

   you can simply use:

Source0:%{url}/archive/%{version}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz

   - Static library are genereally not provided within -devel package, only
share. You should pass -DBUILD_STATIC_LIBS:BOOL=OFF to cmake and remove the *.a
in %files. If you are sure you do need the static files, don't change anything.

  - If stlink-gui is indeed a graphical tool, you must provide a .desktop file
for it. There is an example of how to create an inline desktop file from within
the SPEC here:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Publican_Documentation_Packages#Desktop_.spec_file

 - You should also provide an appdata.xml file. See:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AppData


Package Review
==

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


Issues:
===
- Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
  present.
  Note: Package has .a files: stlink-devel. Does not provide -static:
  stlink-devel.
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#StaticLibraries


= MUST items =

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[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: "BSD (3 clause)", "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF
 address)", "Unknown or generated". 105 files have unknown license.
 Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/stlink
 /review-stlink/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/udev,
 /etc/modprobe.d, /usr/lib/udev/rules.d
[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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package