Bug 2257275

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6872129
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2257275-vulkan-volk/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06872129-vulkan-volk/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Package has .a files: vulkan-volk-devel. Does not provide -static: vulkan-volk-devel.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries

Please know that there can be false-positives.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

fedora-review-service-build

[fedora-review-service-build]

Created attachment 2007799 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6872129 to 6872189

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6872189
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2257275-vulkan-volk/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06872189-vulkan-volk/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/cmake/volk

vulkan-volk-devel.x86_64: E: static-library-without-debuginfo /usr/lib64/libvolk.a

probably should address these?

Hi Dave,

Thanks a lot for your review and sorry for the delay looking into it.

About debug info, I learned that Fedora doesn't ship debug information for packages that only include .a libraries.
There were a proposal to change this behavior, but it wasn't accepted.

A few links about the topic: 

 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/StaticLibraryDebuginfo
 - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=209316
 - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/OFNQT4QPQB4TRHAD4FQTOHXBMORXJWQV/

And the link to the Fedora packaging guide that suggest to disable debug packages for .a files with "%global debug_package %{nil}":
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Debuginfo/#_useless_or_incomplete_debuginfo_packages_due_to_other_reasons

I'm not sure why `fedpkg --release f39 lint` throws this error though, but `fedpkg --release f40 lint` doesn't complain about it.
I think that ignoring this error should be fine.



About the "Directories without known owners" error, I added a "%dir" entry that should fix the issue.

[fedora-review-service-build]

Created attachment 2010143 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6872189 to 6945676

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6945676
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2257275-vulkan-volk/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06945676-vulkan-volk/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Please consider updating to 1.3.268.0 version for the package import so it matches the current vulkan headers and versioning format. This will ensure the package works at import and the version format matches the other packages. A subsequent update to 1.3.275.0 can be done as part of the larger update.

Please also consider updating the source definition to more closely match other vulkan packages.

The goal of these changes are to make it easier to update all related packages to match the upstream tags (seems they are all standardizing some now).

--- vulkan-volk.spec.old	2024-01-24 02:31:33.000000000 -0700
+++ vulkan-volk.spec	2024-01-24 08:18:02.067393608 -0700
@@ -1,13 +1,13 @@
 %global debug_package %{nil}
 
 Name:           vulkan-volk
-Version:        1.3.270
+Version:        1.3.268.0
 Release:        %autorelease
 Summary:        Meta loader for Vulkan API
 
 License:        MIT
 URL:            https://github.com/zeux/volk
-Source0:        %url/archive/refs/tags/%{version}.tar.gz
+Source0:        %url/archive/vulkan-sdk-%{version}.tar.gz#/Vulkan-Volk-sdk-%{version}.tar.gz
 
 BuildRequires:  gcc
 BuildRequires:  cmake3
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@
 %{summary}
 
 %prep
-%autosetup -n volk-%{version} -p1
+%autosetup -n volk-vulkan-sdk-%{version} -p1
 
 %build
 %cmake3 -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release \

Thanks for your review @jonathansteffan 

I planned to upgrade the Vulkan SDK to 1.3.275.0 as soon as volk was accepted, but that's a good point. I changed its version to 1.3.268.0 and I'll upgrade with the other packages.

I applied your changes: https://jexposit.fedorapeople.org/new-packages/vulkan-volk/vulkan-volk.spec

[fedora-review-service-build]

Created attachment 2010446 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 6945676 to 6950702

Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6950702
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2257275-vulkan-volk/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06950702-vulkan-volk/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.


---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

What do you think about the current spec file? Do you think it is ready to be included in Fedora?

I can take over the review if @airlied wants, but it's currently already assigned.

The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/vulkan-volk

Thanks.

https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-7466fed0e5