[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2018-11-04 01:50:12 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- msgpack-d-1.0.0-0.1.beta.7.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- msgpack-d-1.0.0-0.1.beta.7.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c7fe83681a -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- msgpack-d-1.0.0-0.1.beta.7.fc29 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-c7fe83681a -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/msgpack-d -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
Package approved.
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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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: "BSL (v1.0)", "*No copyright* BSL", "Unknown or generated",
"*No copyright* Public domain". 50 files have unknown license.
Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/msgpack-d/review-msgpack-d/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.
[-]: 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 194560 bytes in 41 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
msgpack-d-geany-tags
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 --- Comment #3 from MERCIER Jonathan --- Thanks Robert-André, Your PR was accepted but not yet release thus I keep your spec file using the patches https://bioinfornatics.fedorapeople.org/packages/msgpack-d-1.0.0-1.20180529gitf5c0bd0.fc28.src.rpm https://bioinfornatics.fedorapeople.org/packages/msgpack-d.spec -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
Proposal to port it to Meson:
# debug info seem not works with D compiler
%global debug_package %{nil}
%global major_version 1
%global minor_version 0
%global patch_version 0
%global pre beta.7
Name: msgpack-d
Version:%{major_version}.%{minor_version}.%{patch_version}
Release:0.1%{?pre:.%{pre}}%{?dist}
Summary:MessagePack for D is a pure D implementation of MessagePack
Summary(fr):MessagePack pour D est une implémentation en D de MessagePack
License:Boost
URL:https://github.com/msgpack/msgpack-d
Source0:
%url/archive/v%{version}%{?pre:-%{pre}}/%{name}-%{version}%{?pre:-%{pre}}.tar.gz
Patch0:
https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/msgpack/msgpack-d/pull/107.patch#/0001-Add-Meson-build-definition.patch
Patch1:
https://patch-diff.githubusercontent.com/raw/msgpack/msgpack-d/pull/106.patch#/0002-Fix-line-endings.patch
ExclusiveArch: %{ldc_arches}
BuildRequires: ldc meson
Requires: ldc-phobos ldc-druntime
%description
MessagePack is a binary-based JSON-like serialization library.
%description -l fr
MessagePack est une bibliothèque de sérialisation ressemblant à un format
JSON en binaire.
%packagedevel
Summary:Development files for %{name}
Summary(fr):Fichiers de développement pour %{name}
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
%description devel
msgpack-d-devel package contains header files for developing D applications
that use msgpack-d.
%description devel -l fr
Le paquet msgpack-d-devel contient les fichiers d'entêtes pour développer
des applications en D utilisant msgpack-d.
%package geany-tags
Summary:Support for enable autocompletion in geany
Summary(fr):Support pour activer l'auto-complétion dans geany
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
BuildArch: noarch
BuildRequires: geany
Requires: geany
%description geany-tags
Enable autocompletion for msgpack-d library in geany (IDE)
%description -l fr geany-tags
Active l'autocompletion pour pour la bibliothèque msgpack-d dans geany (IDE)
%prep
%autosetup -p1 -n %{name}-%{version}%{?pre:-%{pre}}
# temp geany config directory for allow geany to generate tags
mkdir geany_config
%build
LDFLAGS='-Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,now' %meson
%meson_build
# generate doc
src_dir='src'
for f in ${sources[@]}; do
d_path=$(dirname ${f});
d_file=$(basename ${f});
doc_file=html/${d_path/${src_dir}}/${d_file/.d/.html};
ldc2 -I "${src_dir}" -o- -c $f -Df $"{doc_file}" html/candydoc/candy.ddoc
html/candydoc/modules.ddoc;
done
# generate geany tags
sources=$(find "${src_dir}" -name '*.d')
geany -c geany_config -g %{name}.d.tags ${sources[@]}
%install
%meson_install
# geany tags
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/geany/tags/
install -pm0644 %{name}.d.tags %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/geany/tags/
%check
%meson_test
%ldconfig_scriptlets
%files
%license LICENSE_1_0.txt
%doc README.markdown
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.%{version}
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.%{major_version}
%files devel
%doc html example
%{_includedir}/d/msgpack
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/%{name}.pc
%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so
%files geany-tags
%{_datadir}/geany/tags/%{name}.d.tags
%changelog
* Wed Aug 1 2018 MERCIER Jonathan -
1.0.0-0.1.beta.7
- Initial release
==
I sent a PR upstream for it: https://github.com/msgpack/msgpack-d/pull/107
--
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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 --- Comment #1 from MERCIER Jonathan --- $ rpmlint -i ../SRPMS/msgpack-d-1.0.0-1.20180529gitf5c0bd0.fc28.src.rpm msgpack-d.src: W: invalid-url Source0: msgpack-d-20180529gitf5c0bd0.tar.xz The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/VB5LENB2MAIOBVU66IWWIF6E7OYOBFOO/
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 MERCIER Jonathan changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1613574 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613574 [Bug 1613574] Review Request: -- 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6UOJGENEU6L2GTP7PSYJJKSS5ITE76HZ/
[Bug 1613570] Review Request: msgpack-d - A pure D implementation of MessagePack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1613570 MERCIER Jonathan changed: What|Removed |Added 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://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/QD3MCI5GXRBNDHUDGKK6OOCP37NZSVTT/
