https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Bug ID: 1260246 Summary: Review Request: memtailor - C++ library of special-purpose memory allocators Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganjerry@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/memtailor/memtailor.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/memtailor/memtailor-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.... Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: Memtailor is a C++ library of special purpose memory allocators. It currently offers an arena allocator and a memory pool.
The main motivation to use a memtailor allocator is better and more predictable performance than you get with new/delete. Sometimes a memtailor allocator can also be more convenient due to the ability to free many allocations at one time.
The Memtailor memory pool is useful if you need to do many allocations of a fixed size. For example a memory pool is well suited to allocate the nodes in a linked list.
You can think of the Memtailor arena allocator as being similar to stack allocation. Both kinds of allocation are very fast and require you to allocate/deallocate memory in last-in-first-out order. Arena allocation has the further benefits that it stays within the C++ standard, it will not cause a stack overflow, you can have multiple arena allocators at the same time and allocation is not tied to a function invocation.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Antonio Trande anto.trande@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |anto.trande@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Antonio Trande anto.trande@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande anto.trande@gmail.com --- Package approved.
Notes:
The code released with "GPL (v2 or later)" is related to source files for test building.
The 'private-shared-object-provides' warning seems a false positive; see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1253917
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]: 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: "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 13 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/sagitter/1260246-memtailor/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 [-]: 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 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 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). [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [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: No rpmlint messages. [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]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: memtailor-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc24.x86_64.rpm memtailor-devel-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc24.x86_64.rpm memtailor-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc24.src.rpm memtailor.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) allocators -> locators, allocates, alligators memtailor.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US allocators -> locators, allocates, alligators memtailor.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US allocator -> allocate, locator, calculator memtailor.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US deallocate -> reallocate, deal locate, deal-locate memtailor-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib memtailor-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation memtailor.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) allocators -> locators, allocates, alligators memtailor.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US allocators -> locators, allocates, alligators memtailor.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US allocator -> allocate, locator, calculator memtailor.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US deallocate -> reallocate, deal locate, deal-locate 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: memtailor-debuginfo-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc24.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory memtailor.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/libmemtailor.so.0.0.0 libmemtailor.so.0()(64bit) memtailor-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib memtailor-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Requires -------- memtailor (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /sbin/ldconfig libc.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH)
memtailor-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config libmemtailor.so.0()(64bit) memtailor(x86-64)
Provides -------- memtailor: libmemtailor.so.0()(64bit) memtailor memtailor(x86-64)
memtailor-devel: memtailor-devel memtailor-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(memtailor)
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/broune/memtailor/tarball/722a30ce258eb38bee0a834406aed60a... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ef6db87ec2d4bea9613ea009162e9b59dba24c1ee65c6decd12b49dc0dadc98e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ef6db87ec2d4bea9613ea009162e9b59dba24c1ee65c6decd12b49dc0dadc98e
Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1260246 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
--- Comment #2 from Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com --- Antonio, thank you very much for the review!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
--- Comment #3 from Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: memtailor Short Description: C++ library of special-purpose memory allocators Upstream URL: https://github.com/broune/memtailor Owners: jjames Branches: f23 InitialCC:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Jerry James loganjerry@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
--- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- memtailor-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-15975
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- memtailor-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.\nIf you want to test the update, you can install it with \n su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update memtailor'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-15975
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- memtailor-0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1260246
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |0-1.20130809.git722a30c.fc2 | |3 Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed| |2015-09-19 14:54:17
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org