Bug 1761614 - Review Request: intel-mediasdk - Hardware-accelerated video processing on Intel integrated GPUs library
Summary: Review Request: intel-mediasdk - Hardware-accelerated video processing on Int...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Michael Cronenworth
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-10-14 21:41 UTC by Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
Modified: 2019-12-05 01:40 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-12-05 01:40:50 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
mike: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2019-10-14 21:41:27 UTC
Spec URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk.spec
SRPM URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-1.fc30.src.rpm
Description:
Intel Media SDK provides a plain C API to access hardware-accelerated video
decode, encode and filtering on Intel Gen graphics hardware platforms.
Implementation written in C++ 11 with parts in C-for-Media (CM).

Supported video encoders: HEVC, AVC, MPEG-2, JPEG, VP9 Supported video decoders:
HEVC, AVC, VP8, VP9, MPEG-2, VC1, JPEG Supported video pre-processing filters:
Color Conversion, Deinterlace, Denoise, Resize, Rotate, Composition

Fedora Account System Username: rathann

Note: This will replace libmfx (which I maintain). libmfx was created as a fork of intel-mediasdk, but the fork author recommends going back to intel-mediasdk for Linux at this time: https://github.com/lu-zero/mfx_dispatch/issues/59#issuecomment-466965897 .

Comment 1 Michael Cronenworth 2019-10-14 22:09:23 UTC
Taking for review.

Comment 2 Michael Cronenworth 2019-10-14 22:13:23 UTC
If it is the case that libmfx recommends the mediasdk, should we add an Obsoletes on libmfx?

Comment 3 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2019-10-15 07:33:17 UTC
You mean mediasdk replaces libmfx and yes, Obsoletes: are in order here.

Comment 4 Michael Cronenworth 2019-10-15 13:06:53 UTC
Fixes required:
- Add Obsoletes: libmfx < %{mfx_version}
- License text must be packaged in a %license macro
- The -devel subpackage must have Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
- Add the package version and release number to the end of the first line of your %changelog entry


Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed



===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
     Note: Sources not installed
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
     Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
     attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[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.
[!]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
     upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
     licenses manually.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/mfx, /usr/share/mfx
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/mfx, /usr/share/mfx
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/mfx(libmfx-
     devel)
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: 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.
[!]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[!]: 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.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[!]: 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]: 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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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).
[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in intel-
     mediasdk-devel
[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.
[x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s).
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
          intel-mediasdk-devel-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
          intel-mediasdk-debuginfo-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
          intel-mediasdk-debugsource-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
          intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-1.fc32.src.rpm
intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-documentation
intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-libs/libintel-mediasdk
intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
intel-mediasdk-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
intel-mediasdk.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
intel-mediasdk.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: intel-mediasdk-debuginfo-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm
intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
	LANGUAGE = (unset),
	LC_ALL = (unset),
	LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8",
	LANG = "en_US.utf8"
    are supported and installed on your system.
perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C").
perl: warning: Setting locale failed.
perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings:
	LANGUAGE = (unset),
	LC_ALL = (unset),
	LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8",
	LANG = "en_US.utf8"
    are supported and installed on your system.
perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C").
intel-mediasdk-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
intel-mediasdk-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://mediasdk.intel.com <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://mediasdk.intel.com <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-documentation
intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://mediasdk.intel.com <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-libs/libintel-mediasdk
intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee

Comment 5 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2019-11-10 01:01:14 UTC
Thanks for the review.

Spec URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk.spec
SRPM URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-2.fc31.src.rpm

* Sat Nov 09 2019 Dominik Mierzejewski <rpm> 19.3.0-2
- Add missing Obsoletes: and Requires:
- Add license text and docs

Comment 6 Michael Cronenworth 2019-11-10 02:32:28 UTC
Looks good. Let's get it in Fedora.

APPROVED

Comment 7 Gwyn Ciesla 2019-11-20 12:14:51 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/intel-mediasdk

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2019-11-29 11:32:25 UTC
FEDORA-2019-1749ddf50e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-1749ddf50e

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2019-11-30 01:19:52 UTC
intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 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-2019-1749ddf50e

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2019-12-05 01:40:50 UTC
intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.