Bug 2359079 (rust-virtfw-libhw)

Summary: Review Request: rust-virtfw-libhw - Library for direct hardware access
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: decathorpe, package-review
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
URL: https://crates.io/crates/virtfw-libhw
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: ---
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-04-16 12:52:25 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On: 2359067    
Bug Blocks: 2359081    

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2025-04-11 12:35:22 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8891117
(failed)

Build log:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2359079-rust-virtfw-libhw/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08891117-rust-virtfw-libhw/builder-live.log.gz

Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.

- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network
  unavailability), please ignore it.
- If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they
  are listed in the "Depends On" field


---
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.

Comment 2 Fabio Valentini 2025-04-15 21:18:31 UTC
Do you expect any "third-party projects" (i.e. any projects other than those in https://gitlab.com/kraxel/virt-firmware-rs) to ever depend on these crates? If not, it might be easier to make a package from the sources on GitLab (one package that doesn't ship Rust source code, but only executables / libraries / ...) instead of N packages for N separately published-to-crates.io workspace members.

Comment 3 Gerd Hoffmann 2025-04-16 09:38:38 UTC
(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #2)
> Do you expect any "third-party projects" (i.e. any projects other than those
> in https://gitlab.com/kraxel/virt-firmware-rs) to ever depend on these
> crates?

unlikely for libhw, maybe for libefi.

> If not, it might be easier to make a package from the sources on
> GitLab (one package that doesn't ship Rust source code, but only executables
> / libraries / ...) instead of N packages for N separately
> published-to-crates.io workspace members.

Does rust2rpm support that too?

Using the rust2rpm automatic packaging looked attractive to me, and
it actually works fine for all packages except efi-apps which must
be built for --target $arch-unknown-uefi.

Comment 4 Gerd Hoffmann 2025-04-16 11:11:47 UTC
Hmm, cargo2rpm insists on collecting all dependencies for the workspace when I try to work with a virt-firmware-rs tarball.  When building only some of the crates that pulls in dependencies not actually needed ...

Comment 5 Gerd Hoffmann 2025-04-16 12:10:08 UTC
With rpm macros doing most of the actual work not using rust2rpm turned out to not be too much of a problem.

https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/kraxel/rust.misc/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08909843-rust-virt-firmware/rust-virt-firmware.spec

Comment 6 Gerd Hoffmann 2025-04-16 12:51:14 UTC
It's bug 2360119 now.

Comment 7 Gerd Hoffmann 2025-04-16 12:52:25 UTC

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2360119 ***