spec file: quality assurance for test-cases

[Olf0]

• Introduce %defattr(-,root,root,-) in %files section
• Alter package name: test-cases→testcases, because it becomes prefixed with %{name}- to patchmanager-testcases (avoiding two hyphens).
• Obey SailfishOS:Chum PR 70
• Overhaul descriptions: Summary:, %description and "Chum metadata"
• Generically applied %{url} at many places and %{name} at a few additional ones.
• Clean up %files testcase section conforming to classic, authoritative references.

[Olf0]

@nephros, too late I became aware, that I did not really review the test cases branch.
I did that for the spec file, now. Please check:

• Introduce %defattr(-,root,root,-) in %files section

  IMO it was missing. I assume rpmlint would have complained.
  Is the usual -,root,root,- correct here?

• Prefix / alter package name: test-cases→patchmanager-testcases

  I realised, that it is "really bad™", if the test-cases are not prefixed with patchmanager in larger repositories as SailfishOS:Chum. I.e., the test-cases RPM always ought to be listed in close proximity to the proper patchmanager RPM. This can be most easily achieved by prefixing patchmanager, then I decided to also drop the second dash.
  Edit: The first part was utter nonsense, see spec file: quality assurance for test-cases #289 (comment).

• Obey Metadata.md: Document that contiguousness is a must sailfishos-chum/main#70

  We have been bitten once (see issue SailfishOS:Chum does not allow for comment lines in the %description section of a spec file #274), avoid repeating this.

[Olf0]

Checks & Balances question: Does the rpmlintrc file need some adaption(s) to also properly check these new parts of the spec file?

[nephros]

That doesn´t do what we want.

A subpackage in a .spec is automatically prefixed with the main package name.

This change would result in a patchmanager-patchmanager-testcases rpm.

Either use

%package -n %{name}-testcases

which would work but is redundant

or

%package testcases

if you want to drop the hyphen

PS: example build here: https://build.sailfishos.org/package/binaries/home:nephros:devel/patchmanager?repository=sailfishos_4.3_arm

[Olf0]

Thank you for reviewing: While I have ("involuntary" due to packaging my little scripts for SFOS) some extended experience with RPM, I never used sub-packages before. Hence I was not aware of this detail, the automatic prefixing with %{name}-.

So I reverted this (three times), but left out what ultimately did become the "second hyphen", see commit 6e5a006.

[nephros]

Same here, see comment on %package above.

[Olf0]

… and a third time for the sub-package's %description (commit 6e5a006).

[nephros]

I'm not sure all the macros using %{url} and friends don't trip up rpmlint somewhere.

Have you tested that those do what they are intended to do? [EDIT:] Nope, rpmlint at least is fune with it according to https://build.sailfishos.org/package/binaries/home:nephros:devel/patchmanager test build.

Also see inline coments about package name.

[nephros]

Please check:

• Introduce %defattr(-,root,root,-) in %files section

  IMO it was missing. I assume rpmlint would have complained.
  Is the usual -,root,root,- correct here?

Yes it is and should be there.
Without it, the permissions set in the %install phase are used, and some build environments (including the one on chum) set 755 or something like that on all source files per default so many files run the risk of being installed executable.

[Olf0]

I took a closer look at the %files section and cleaned it up by commit a41e9a9:

1. IMO any <directory>/* (…works, but…) should be just <directory>.
2. The sequence
   %dir <directory>
<directory>
   does not make any sense, IMO.

Reference, e.g., http://ftp.rpm.org/max-rpm/s1-rpm-inside-files-list-directives.html#S3-RPM-INSIDE-DIR-DIRECTIVE

Please re-review!

P.S.:

Have you tested that those do what they are intended to do?

No, as so often due to being "outta time", unfortunately.
I should improve on that, especially because …

[EDIT:] Nope, rpmlint at least is fine with it according to https://build.sailfishos.org/package/binaries/home:nephros:devel/patchmanager test build.

One does not need to perform separate test builds: On every commit to a PR destined for the master branch a test build is automatically performed at Patchmanager's GitHub-actions build-runner. A freshly built RPM is usually available a few minutes after each commit.

BTW, the %{name}, %{url}, %{summary}, %{version} etc. "variable" evaluations are substituted very early when rpmbuild processes a spec file: I have never seen these substitutions fail or happening too late (AFAIR this is impossible).

Also see inline comments about package name.

They also nicely displayed here (above) at the Conversations "tab" of a PR in GitHub's web-frontend, not only as inline comments at the Files changed "tab": Thanks, resolved.

[nephros]

One does not need to perform separate test builds: On every commit to a PR destined for the master branch a test build is automatically performed at Patchmanager's GitHub-actions build-runner. A freshly built RPM is usually available a few minutes after each commit.

Yes, but it builds the exactly branch the PR originates from, while my "obs" branch is master plus whatever changes I want to test against (usually the pr branch plus maybe some quick fixes if, or another branch I want to test together with the PR).

[nephros]

I took a closer look at the %files section and cleaned it up by commit a41e9a9:

1. IMO any <directory>/* (…works, but…) should be just <directory>.
2. The sequence
   %dir <directory>
<directory>
   does not make any sense, IMO.

Thanks that's better indeed.