Spec URL: https://xvitaly.fedorapeople.org/for-review/mpv.spec SRPM URL: https://xvitaly.fedorapeople.org/for-review/mpv-0.34.1-10.fc36.src.rpm Description: Movie player playing most video formats and DVDs Fedora Account System Username: xvitaly Moving this package from the RPM Fusion repository. I'm its maintainer in RPM Fusion.
Fixed rpmlint warnings. Spec URL: https://xvitaly.fedorapeople.org/for-review/mpv.spec SRPM URL: https://xvitaly.fedorapeople.org/for-review/mpv-0.34.1-11.fc36.src.rpm
Taking this review.
Initial spec review: > %if 0%{?fedora} > BuildRequires: libshaderc-devel > BuildRequires: pkgconfig(vulkan) > BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libplacebo) > %else > %ifarch x86_64 > BuildRequires: pkgconfig(vulkan) > %endif > %endif All this conditional logic can be removed. The dependencies listed in the Fedora case also exist in EPEL 9, and Vulkan is not locked to x86_64 on RHEL 9. > %if 0%{?fedora} > Recommends: (yt-dlp or youtube-dl) > %else > Recommends: youtube-dl > %endif Rich dependencies work in all versions of RHEL that support weak dependencies, so you can rip this conditional out and use just the Fedora one for everything. > %package libs-devel The "libs-devel" name is... odd. I've not seen very many examples of this. Consider renaming it to "mpv-devel" or adding Provides to make it fit common conventions. > %files > %docdir %{_docdir}/%{name}/ > %{_docdir}/%{name}/ Wouldn't "%doc %{_docdir}/%{name}/" do the same thing here? > %files libs > %{_libdir}/lib%{name}.so.* The mpv library soname needs to be tracked. Cf. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_shared_libraries
> All this conditional logic can be removed. The dependencies listed in the Fedora case also exist in EPEL 9, and Vulkan is not locked to x86_64 on RHEL 9. Removed. > Rich dependencies work in all versions of RHEL that support weak dependencies, so you can rip this conditional out and use just the Fedora one for everything. Fixed. > The "libs-devel" name is... odd. I've not seen very many examples of this. Consider renaming it to "mpv-devel" or adding Provides to make it fit common conventions. Fixed. > Wouldn't "%doc %{_docdir}/%{name}/" do the same thing here? No. %docdir qualifier is required to mark all files from %{_docdir}/%{name}/ as documentation on RPM level. > The mpv library soname needs to be tracked. Done.
Spec URL: https://xvitaly.fedorapeople.org/for-review/mpv.spec SRPM URL: https://xvitaly.fedorapeople.org/for-review/mpv-0.34.1-11.fc36.src.rpm
Package review notes: * Package is named properly per packaging guidelines * Package builds and installs * Package licensing is correct and license files are correctly installed * No serious issues from rpmlint PACKAGE APPROVED.
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mpv
FEDORA-2022-2cd1e85046 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-2cd1e85046
FEDORA-2022-2cd1e85046 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-2cd1e85046 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-2cd1e85046 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2022-2cd1e85046 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.