Hide Forgot
Spec URL: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet.spec SRPM URL: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet-0.3-4.e427b3e.fc20.src.rpm Description: Beignet is an open source implementaion of the OpenCL specification - a generic compute oriented API. This code base contains the code to run OpenCL programs on Intel GPUs which bsically defines and implements the OpenCL host functions required to initialize the device, create the command queues, the kernels and the programs and run them on the GPU. Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain
Scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6400516 -- Looking for mesa source code - not found, cl_khr_gl_sharing will be disabled. Any explanation?
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #1) > Scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6400516 > > -- Looking for mesa source code - not found, cl_khr_gl_sharing will be > disabled. > > Any explanation? Need mesa-debuginfo for build, but when I'm adding it to BR - mock ignoring it.
(In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #1) > Scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6400516 > > -- Looking for mesa source code - not found, cl_khr_gl_sharing will be > disabled. > > Any explanation? Looks like it should be built with the Mesa sources. I think resolving this may be postponed (let's file a Bugzilla ticket later, right after the inclusion into Fedora).
I'll review it.
REVIEW: Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable - rpmlint is not silent work ~/Desktop: rpmlint beignet-* beignet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementaion -> implementation, implementable, supplementation beignet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bsically -> basically, classically ^^^ This time these are real issues. Please fix typos. beignet.src:10: W: macro-in-comment %{version} beignet.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %setup beignet.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %{version} ^^^ I don't see these as a blockers. Just fyi - this can be silenced by escaping them with additional "%" sign (e.g. %%{version}, %%{setup}). beignet.src:63: W: deprecated-grep [u'egrep'] ^^^ Looks like false positive. beignet.src:67: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/beignet/ ^^^ I'm afraid that's a blocker. This shold go into %{_libdir}/beignet/ . As for rpath it's ok since it falls into "Rpath for Internal Libraries" case: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Rpath_for_Internal_Libraries beignet.src: W: invalid-url Source0: beignet-e427b3e.tar.gz ^^^ That's ok for SCM snapshots. beignet.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementaion -> implementation, implementable, supplementation beignet.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bsically -> basically, classically ^^^ See my notes above. beignet.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.3-3.e427b3e ['0.3-4.e427b3e.fc21', '0.3-4.e427b3e'] ^^^ Please fix %changelog entry. beignet.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/OpenCL/vendors/intel-beignet.icd ^^^ That's intentional. This file shouldn't be edited by users. beignet.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/beignet/ocl_stdlib.h ^^^ I don't fully realize OpenCL development workflow, but maybe it's better to move these bits into the devel part? I mostly concerned about these files: /usr/lib/beignet/ocl_stdlib.h /usr/lib/beignet/ocl_stdlib.h.pch What's the purpose of /usr/lib/beignet/beignet.bc btw? Is this an OpenCL core or something like that? beignet-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementaion -> implementation, implementable, supplementation ^^^ See my notes above. 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 13 warnings. work ~/Desktop: + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines. + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (LGPLv2 or later) + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included in %doc. - The spec file must be written in American English w/o grammar errors. See my notes regarging rpmling issues above. + The spec file for the package is legible. + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. See koji link above. + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. 0 No need to handle locales. 0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths. + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. 0 The package is not designed to be relocatable. + The package owns all directories that it creates. + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings. + Permissions on files are set properly. + The package consistently uses macros. + The package contains code, or permissible content. 0 No extremely large documentation files. + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the application. +/- Almost all header files are stored in a -devel package. See my note about the only C header which is stored in the main package. 0 No static libraries. 0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files. 0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so) in some of the dynamic linker's default paths. + The -devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. 0 Not a GUI application. + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. Please fix/comment my notes and I'll finish this.
(In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #5) > REVIEW: > > Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable > > - rpmlint is not silent > > work ~/Desktop: rpmlint beignet-* > beignet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementaion -> > implementation, implementable, supplementation > beignet.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bsically -> basically, > classically > > ^^^ This time these are real issues. Please fix typos. Fixed. > beignet.src:10: W: macro-in-comment %{version} > beignet.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %setup > beignet.src:46: W: macro-in-comment %{version} > > ^^^ I don't see these as a blockers. Just fyi - this can be silenced by > escaping them with additional "%" sign (e.g. %%{version}, %%{setup}). Unlike for me. > beignet.src:63: W: deprecated-grep [u'egrep'] > > ^^^ Looks like false positive. Really weird. > beignet.src:67: E: hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib/beignet/ > > ^^^ I'm afraid that's a blocker. This shold go into %{_libdir}/beignet/ . As > for rpath it's ok since it falls into "Rpath for Internal Libraries" case: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging: > Guidelines#Rpath_for_Internal_Libraries I've tried to change buildsystem to use libdir, but package isn't useful. Anyway we can't onetime use x86_64 and i386 packages. But submitted question to upstream. > beignet.src: W: invalid-url Source0: beignet-e427b3e.tar.gz > > ^^^ That's ok for SCM snapshots. > > beignet.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementaion -> > implementation, implementable, supplementation > beignet.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bsically -> > basically, classically > > ^^^ See my notes above. > > beignet.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.3-3.e427b3e > ['0.3-4.e427b3e.fc21', '0.3-4.e427b3e'] > > ^^^ Please fix %changelog entry. Fixed. > beignet.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/OpenCL/vendors/intel-beignet.icd > > ^^^ That's intentional. This file shouldn't be edited by users. > > beignet.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package > /usr/lib/beignet/ocl_stdlib.h > > ^^^ I don't fully realize OpenCL development workflow, but maybe it's better > to move these bits into the devel part? No. w/o/ this files it doesn't work > I mostly concerned about these files: > > /usr/lib/beignet/ocl_stdlib.h > /usr/lib/beignet/ocl_stdlib.h.pch > > What's the purpose of /usr/lib/beignet/beignet.bc btw? Is this an OpenCL > core or something like that? yes. > beignet-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementaion > -> implementation, implementable, supplementation > > ^^^ See my notes above. > > 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 13 warnings. > work ~/Desktop: > > + The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. > + The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format > %{name}.spec. > + The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. > + The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the > Licensing Guidelines. > + The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license > (LGPLv2 or later) > + The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is > included in %doc. > > - The spec file must be written in American English w/o grammar errors. See > my notes regarging rpmling issues above. > > + The spec file for the package is legible. > + The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least > one primary architecture. See koji link above. > + All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. > 0 No need to handle locales. > 0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths. > + The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries. > 0 The package is not designed to be relocatable. > + The package owns all directories that it creates. > + The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files > listings. > + Permissions on files are set properly. > + The package consistently uses macros. > + The package contains code, or permissible content. > 0 No extremely large documentation files. > + Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the > application. > > +/- Almost all header files are stored in a -devel package. See my note > about the only C header which is stored in the main package. > > 0 No static libraries. > 0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files. > 0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. > libfoo.so) in some of the dynamic linker's default paths. > + The -devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned > dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > + The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives. > 0 Not a GUI application. > + The package does not own files or directories already owned by other > packages. > + All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8. > > > Please fix/comment my notes and I'll finish this. New SPEC: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet.spec New SRPM: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet-0.3-5.e427b3e.fc20.src.rpm
Just fixed also libdir. New SPEC: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet.spec New SRPM: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet-0.3-7.984d680.fc20.src.rpm
Well. All my patches in upstream[0][1][2], so drop it! New SPEC: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet.spec New SRPM: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet-0.3-8.48f8e5b.fc20.src.rpm Peter, please do review some faster =) -- [0]http://cgit.freedesktop.org/beignet/commit/?id=9a94d1fb4db2b7bf98103b6ce7e162363041c878 [1]http://cgit.freedesktop.org/beignet/commit/?id=b63cd9bca17ef948f39454e642f375d1c3b8ca49 [2]http://cgit.freedesktop.org/beignet/commit/?id=48f8e5b1d27436c771175f7d407125c41f00171f
(In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #8) > Well. > > All my patches in upstream[0][1][2], so drop it! > > New SPEC: http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet.spec > New SRPM: > http://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/beignet-0.3-8.48f8e5b.fc20. > src.rpm > > Peter, please do review some faster =) > > -- > [0]http://cgit.freedesktop.org/beignet/commit/ > ?id=9a94d1fb4db2b7bf98103b6ce7e162363041c878 > [1]http://cgit.freedesktop.org/beignet/commit/ > ?id=b63cd9bca17ef948f39454e642f375d1c3b8ca49 > [2]http://cgit.freedesktop.org/beignet/commit/ > ?id=48f8e5b1d27436c771175f7d407125c41f00171f Ok, looks good now. I don't see any other issues so this package is APPROVED.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: beignet Short Description: Open source implementation of the OpenCL for Intel GPUs Owners: ignatenkobrain Branches: f20 InitialCC:
Git done (by process-git-requests).
beignet-0.3-8.48f8e5b.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/beignet-0.3-8.48f8e5b.fc20
beignet-0.3-8.48f8e5b.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository.
beignet-0.3-9.48f8e5b.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository.
beignet-0.3-9.48f8e5b.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.