Spec URL: https://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/review/prusa-slicer/prusa-slicer.spec SRPM URL: https://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/review/prusa-slicer/prusa-slicer-2.0.0-1.fc31.src.rpm Description: PrusaSlicer takes 3D models (STL, OBJ, AMF) and converts them into G-code instructions for FFF printers or PNG layers for mSLA 3D printers. It's compatible with any modern printer based on the RepRap toolchain, including all those based on the Marlin, Prusa, Sprinter and Repetier firmware. It also works with Mach3, LinuxCNC and Machinekit controllers. PrusaSlicer is based on Slic3r by Alessandro Ranelucci and the RepRap community. Fedora Account System Username: tibbs Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=35318604 Please note that this is essentially a rename of the existing slic3r-prusa3d package, on top of which I have done extensive packaging work to re-enable the test suite and untangle the status of many bundled libraries. Upstream has decided to rename its fork as part of the release of a significant new version. Because the new program uses a different configuration file location (~/.PrusaSlicer instead of ~/.Slic3rPE or .Slic3rPE-beta), this new version is not quite suitable as an update for F29 or F30. rpmlint says: prusa-slicer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mSLA -> ms La, slam, ms-la prusa-slicer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, Chaitin prusa-slicer.src:135: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(boost-nowide) prusa-slicer.src:139: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(igl) prusa-slicer.src:150: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(mesa-libGLU) prusa-slicer.src:172: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(nanosvg) prusa-slicer.src:186: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(polypartition) prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mSLA -> ms La, slam, ms-la prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, Chaitin prusa-slicer.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/prusa-slicer/COPYING-avrdude prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary prusa-slicer I would provide versions for those bundled libraries but in those cases I haven't been able to determine which version to use (or upstream just doesn't use versions). And while it would be nice to have a manual page for prusa-slicer and I indeed might write one at some point, that wouldn't generally be a review blocker. If you see strange-permission warnings on the srpm, that's due to my umask (0770) and won't appear with packages generated by the Fedora buildsys. Finally, as this package is an evolution of an existing package, I have kept the old changelog entries. I realized I should delete entries between this package and the last released package, but if approved I'll do that before importing.
I suppose I should clarify in case it's not clear: This package replaces the slic3r-prusa3d package in F31 (by obsoleting and providing it according to the packaging guidelines for renames) but because of the issue with the renamed configuration directory, in F29 and F30 it will coexist with slic3r-prusa3d and indeed all three of slic3r, slic3r-prusa3d and prusa-slicer can be installed at the same time. I will submit a release note for F31 with information about the configuration directory. The configurations do appear to be compatible if the directory is simply renamed, though they will be upgraded. Simply adding a symlink wouldn't work as the configuration will be upgraded such that the old version will complain. (I did try.)
# Check these bundled libraries # src/igl # src/imgui # src/libnest2d # src/nanosvg This comment can go away now I suppose. %_datadir/PrusaSlicer/{icons,models,profiles,shaders}/ Who owns %_datadir/PrusaSlicer ? #mkdir notest #mv t/{combineinfill.t,custom_gcode.t,fill.t,multi.t,retraction.t} notest Why si this commented out? The tests started to work again?
> This comment can go away now I suppose. You're right, fixed. > Who owns %_datadir/PrusaSlicer ? Indeed, %dir added there. I'd forgotten it when setting up the %lang tagging. > Why si this commented out? The tests started to work again? The upstream bug was fixed and I cherry picked the patch. Forgot to remove that bit after verifying that the patch worked. The bug I filed generated some interesting discussion as it found a real bug but they claim that we shouldn't be turning on the compiler flag that found the bug because it's a performance loss. It's a Fedora-default flag, not something specifically done in this package. I've updated the package to release 2: Spec: https://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/review/prusa-slicer/prusa-slicer.spec SRPM: https://www.math.uh.edu/~tibbs/review/prusa-slicer/prusa-slicer-2.0.0-2.fc31.src.rpm Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=35320754 (will take some time to finish) I still need to cherry pick a few patches to fix some minor interface bugs, but that will be a work in progress thing.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Here are my notes, but they are all suggestions, so consider this APPROVED. Thanks for the hard work! 1. Consider this: [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 4526080 bytes in /usr/share 2. Can you reproduce this? prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission 07282eb24d027817b4279f59ebbf0d80bac5f950.patch 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission patch-expat-includes 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission patch-qhull-includes 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission prusa-slicer.appdata.xml 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission prusa-slicer.desktop 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission prusa-slicer.spec 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission version_2.0.0.tar.gz 660 3. Also, i suggest to update the summary to something more applicable (this summary is still from slic3r (yes, upstream still has this on GitHub)). ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/PrusaSlicer (fixed in -2) [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [-]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: 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. [x]: 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. [-]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate if there is such a file. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [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). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [?]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 4526080 bytes in /usr/share [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]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: prusa-slicer-2.0.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm prusa-slicer-debuginfo-2.0.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm prusa-slicer-debugsource-2.0.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm prusa-slicer-2.0.0-1.fc31.src.rpm prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mSLA -> ms La, slam, ms-la prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, touchline prusa-slicer.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/prusa-slicer/COPYING-avrdude prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary prusa-slicer prusa-slicer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mSLA -> ms La, slam, ms-la prusa-slicer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, touchline prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission 07282eb24d027817b4279f59ebbf0d80bac5f950.patch 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission patch-expat-includes 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission patch-qhull-includes 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission prusa-slicer.appdata.xml 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission prusa-slicer.desktop 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission prusa-slicer.spec 660 prusa-slicer.src: W: strange-permission version_2.0.0.tar.gz 660 prusa-slicer.src:137: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(boost-nowide) prusa-slicer.src:141: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(igl) prusa-slicer.src:152: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(mesa-libGLU) prusa-slicer.src:174: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(nanosvg) prusa-slicer.src:188: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(polypartition) 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 17 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: prusa-slicer-debuginfo-2.0.0-1.fc31.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US mSLA -> ms La, slam, ms-la prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US toolchain -> tool chain, tool-chain, touchline prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/ <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> prusa-slicer.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/licenses/prusa-slicer/COPYING-avrdude prusa-slicer.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary prusa-slicer 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/archive/version_2.0.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 5d3c7fd745f2875be55f316cd779805ce1b6ce38634f0f4b0ccd01884da731b3 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5d3c7fd745f2875be55f316cd779805ce1b6ce38634f0f4b0ccd01884da731b3 Requires -------- prusa-slicer (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): hicolor-icon-theme ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libGL.so.1()(64bit) libGLEW.so.2.1()(64bit) libGLU.so.1()(64bit) libboost_filesystem.so.1.69.0()(64bit) libboost_locale.so.1.69.0()(64bit) libboost_log.so.1.69.0()(64bit) libboost_regex.so.1.69.0()(64bit) libboost_thread.so.1.69.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcurl.so.4()(64bit) libexpat.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libminiz.so.0.2()(64bit) libnlopt.so.0()(64bit) libpoly2tri.so.1.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) libtbb.so.2()(64bit) libwx_baseu-3.0.so.0()(64bit) libwx_baseu-3.0.so.0(WXU_3.0)(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_adv-3.0.so.0()(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_adv-3.0.so.0(WXU_3.0)(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_adv-3.0.so.0(WXU_3.0.3)(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_core-3.0.so.0()(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_core-3.0.so.0(WXU_3.0)(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_gl-3.0.so.0()(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_gl-3.0.so.0(WXU_3.0)(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_html-3.0.so.0()(64bit) libwx_gtk3u_html-3.0.so.0(WXU_3.0)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) prusa-slicer-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): prusa-slicer-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- prusa-slicer: PrusaSlicer application() application(prusa-slicer.desktop) bundled(admesh-libs) bundled(agg) bundled(avrdude) bundled(boost-nowide) bundled(igl) bundled(imgui) bundled(libnest2d) bundled(mesa-libGLU) bundled(miniz) bundled(nanosvg) bundled(polyclipping) bundled(polypartition) bundled(qhull) bundled(semver) bundled(shinyprofiler) metainfo() metainfo(prusa-slicer.appdata.xml) prusa-slicer prusa-slicer(x86-64) slic3r-prusa3d prusa-slicer-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) prusa-slicer-debuginfo prusa-slicer-debuginfo(x86-64) prusa-slicer-debugsource: prusa-slicer-debugsource prusa-slicer-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.0 (fed5495) last change: 2019-03-17 Command line :try-fedora-review -b 1717652 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Ocaml, fonts, SugarActivity, Python, PHP, R, Java, Perl, Ruby, Haskell Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Thanks. Some responses: I can't imagine that 4.5MB of data in /usr/share/PrusaSlicer is considered large, given what I see in my /usr/share currently. It's about 2MB icons (about 40% of which is images of the prusa printers) and 2MB translations. Doesn't seem really worth it to try and split it out when it wouldn't save anything for any spin or end user system, but if more translations pile in then it might be worth it. I mentioned in the initial message that you may see the strange-permissions thing if running rpmlint directly on the srpm I provided. My umask is 0770 (because we use the posix ACL schema here where every user has their own group) and "fedpkg srpm" creates the source package using the on-disk permissions, which is arguably a bug but not one that matters except that rpmlint complains for whatever reason. The packages generated from the buildsystem won't have that issue. And yes, the summary is exactly what upstream is currently using, both on their github repo and in the Debian packaging metadata they maintain (hidden in the "debian" branch). I'm not sure what text would be better, though it's pretty hilarious that it doesn't explicitly mention Prusa. Just saying "G-code generator optimized for Prusa printers" would work, I guess, but still assumes you know what G-code means. Maybe copying the cura package and using "3D printer control software optimized for Prusa printers" would be OK. I think I'll go with that.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/prusa-slicer
(In reply to Jason Tibbitts from comment #5) > Thanks. Some responses: > > I can't imagine that 4.5MB of data in /usr/share/PrusaSlicer is considered > large, given what I see in my /usr/share currently. It's about 2MB icons > (about 40% of which is images of the prusa printers) and 2MB translations. > Doesn't seem really worth it to try and split it out when it wouldn't save > anything for any spin or end user system, but if more translations pile in > then it might be worth it. Ack. > I mentioned in the initial message that you may see the strange-permissions > thing if running rpmlint directly on the srpm I provided. My umask is 0770 > (because we use the posix ACL schema here where every user has their own > group) and "fedpkg srpm" creates the source package using the on-disk > permissions, which is arguably a bug but not one that matters except that > rpmlint complains for whatever reason. The packages generated from the > buildsystem won't have that issue. I've missed that in the original message. Ack. > And yes, the summary is exactly what upstream is currently using, both on > their github repo and in the Debian packaging metadata they maintain (hidden > in the "debian" branch). I'm not sure what text would be better, though > it's pretty hilarious that it doesn't explicitly mention Prusa. Just saying > "G-code generator optimized for Prusa printers" would work, I guess, but > still assumes you know what G-code means. Maybe copying the cura package > and using "3D printer control software optimized for Prusa printers" would > be OK. I think I'll go with that. Does it control the printer already? If not, what about: 3D printing slicer optimized for Prusa printers
BTW The appdata screenshot would appreciate some love https://www.prusa3d.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/image.jpg
Given that PrusaSlicer does firmware updates, I'd say it does at least some "control" even if it has temporarily lost the ability to directly drive the printer via USB. I looked for a better screenshot but none is provided by upstream. The ones on the main Prusa site are either embedded in movies or small. I don't think we're supposed to just take a random screenshot and put it in some Fedora space, are we? It certainly wouldn't be appropriate to put it in some personal location. Their provided Debian packaging doesn't include an appdata file so that's no help.
Maybe we can take a screenshot and put it to their debian branch together with the appdata file?
I filed https://github.com/prusa3d/PrusaSlicer/issues/2468 asking for them to take some better screenshots and put them in a stable location. They may be getting tired of bugs from me, though.
FEDORA-2019-16dd834c28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-16dd834c28
FEDORA-2019-e27b2957ca has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-e27b2957ca
prusa-slicer-2.0.0-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-16dd834c28
prusa-slicer-2.0.0-2.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-e27b2957ca
prusa-slicer-2.0.0-3.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-16dd834c28
prusa-slicer-2.0.0-3.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-e27b2957ca
prusa-slicer-2.0.0-3.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
prusa-slicer-2.0.0-3.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.