Pakettien tarkistusohjeet
Tämä on joukko pakettiarvioita koskevia ohjeita. Huomaa, että täydellinen luettelo tarkistettavista asioista olisi mahdotonta, mutta asiakirja on pyritty tekemään mahdollisimman kattavaksi. Arvioijien ja avustajien (pakkaajien) tulisi käyttää parasta harkintaansa aina, kun tuotteet ovat epäselviä, ja jos olet epävarma, kysy Fedora -paketointiluettelosta.
Pakettien tarkistusprosessi
Avustajien ja arvostelijoiden PITÄÄ noudattaa Pakettien tarkistusprosessi seuraavin poikkeuksin:
-
FPC myöntää nimenomaisen vapautuksen prosessista, kuten on ilmoitettu tässä.
-
Pakettia ollaan luomassa siten, että saman paketin useita versioita voi esiintyä rinnakkain jakelussa (tai rinnakkain EPEL:n ja RHEL:n välillä). Paketti on PITÄÄ nimetä oikein xref: Naming.adoc # _multiple_packages_with_the_same_base_name [nimeämisohjeet] mukaan ja EI SAA olla ristiriidassa saman paketin kaikkien muiden versioiden kanssa.
-
Paketti on olemassa sekä Fedorassa että RHEL:ssä, mutta pakkaaja haluaa lähettää sen EPEL:ssä vaihtoehtoisella nimellä (kuten EPEL:n käytäntö edellyttää) alipaketin tarjoamiseksi. joka on olemassa Fedorassa, mutta jota ei ole (tai ei toimiteta) RHEL:ssä.
Tarkastettavia asioita
Tarkistettavaksi on monia asioita. Tämän luettelon tarkoituksena on auttaa uusia arvostelijoita tunnistamaan alueet, joita heidän tulisi etsiä, mutta se ei ole missään nimessä täydellinen. Tarkastajien tulisi käyttää omaa harkintaansa arvioidessaan paketteja. Luetellut tuotteet jaetaan kahteen luokkaan: PITÄISI ja PITÄÄ.
-
MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review. See Packaging Guidelines: Use rpmlint
-
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
-
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package
%{name}
, in the format%{name}.spec
unless your package has an exemption. See Packaging Guidelines: Spec File Naming . -
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
-
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines .
-
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. See Licensing Guidelines: Valid License Short Names
-
MUST: 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 must be included in
%license
. See Licensing Guidelines: License Text -
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. See Packaging Guidelines: Summary and description
-
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. See Packaging Guidelines: Spec Legibility
-
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use sha256sum for this task as it is used by the
sources
file once imported into git. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. -
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. See Packaging Guidelines: Architecture Support
-
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch
. Each architecture listed inExcludeArch
MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the correspondingExcludeArch
line. See Packaging Guidelines: Architecture Build Failures -
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in
BuildRequires
. See Packaging Guidelines: Build-Time Dependencies (BuildRequires) -
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang
macro. Using%{_datadir}/locale/*
is strictly forbidden. See Packaging Guidelines: Handling Locale Files -
MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. See Packaging Guidelines: Bundling and Duplication of System Libraries
-
MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker. See Packaging Guidelines: Relocatable Packages
-
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create that directory. See Packaging Guidelines: File And Directory Ownership
-
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file’s %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)See Packaging Guidelines: Duplicate Files
-
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. See Packaging Guidelines: File Permissions
-
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. See Packaging Guidelines: Macros
-
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. See What Can Be Packaged
-
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition of large is left up to the packager’s best judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). See Packaging Guidelines: Documentation
-
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run properly if it is not present. See Packaging Guidelines: Documentation
-
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. See Packaging Guidelines: Packaging Static Libraries
-
MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package. See Packaging Guidelines: Devel Packages
-
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
See Packaging Guidelines: Requiring Base Package -
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. See Packaging Guidelines: Packaging Static Libraries
-
MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation. See Packaging Guidelines: Desktop files
-
MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with any of the files or directories owned by the
filesystem
orman
package. If you feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another package owns, then please present that at package review time. See Packaging Guidelines: File and Directory Ownership -
MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. See Packaging Guidelines: Non-ASCII Filenames
-
MUST: Packages being added to the distribution MUST NOT depend on any packages which have been marked as being deprecated. See Deprecating Packages
-
SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. See Licensing Guidelines: License Text
-
SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See Using Mock to test package builds
-
SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. See Packaging Guidelines: Architecture Support
-
SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example.
-
SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. See Packaging Guidelines: Scriptlets
-
SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. See Packaging Guidelines: Requiring Base Package
-
SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. See Packaging Guidelines: Pkgconfig Files
-
SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. See Packaging Guidelines: File and Directory Dependencies
-
SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn’t, work with upstream to add them where they make sense. See Packaging Guidelines: Manpages
Huomautus riippuvuuksista
Usein on hyödyllistä toimittaa paketti tarkistettavaksi yhdessä sen riippuvuuksien kanssa erillisinä lippuina. Niin kauan kuin lähettäjä määrittää bugzillan riippuvuudet: ja estää: -kentät oikein, tämä ei ole ongelma, ja on täysin mahdollista tarkistaa nämä paketit ennen kuin koko riippuvuusketju on jakelussa (ylläpitämällä paikallista arkistoa, pakettien rakentaminen ja asentaminen paikallisesti tai Coprin ylläpito).
However, please keep in mind that you cannot do koji builds if all of the build dependencies are not met (because you cannot provide additional dependencies to koji) and when the time comes to build these packages, they must be built in order and you must wait between builds for the dependencies to make it into the appropriate branch of the distribution. This can be automated using side tags and chain builds.
Huomaa myös, että vaikka saatat pystyä todella rakentamaan paketin, koska kaikki sen rakennusajan riippuvuudet täyttyvät, paketti voi silti olla asentamaton (ja siten hyödytön), jos sen runtime riippuvuudet eivät täyty. Pakettia EI TULE rakentaa, jos jokin sen ajonaikaisista riippuvuuksista on tyytymätön.
Want to help? Learn how to contribute to Fedora Docs ›