Spec URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile.spec SRPM URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile-0.14.5-1.fc36.src.rpm Description: SILE is a typesetting system; its job is to produce beautiful printed documents. Conceptually, SILE is similar to TeX—from which it borrows some concepts and even syntax and algorithms—but the similarities end there. Rather than being a derivative of the TeX family SILE is a new typesetting and layout engine written from the ground up using modern technologies and borrowing some ideas from graphical systems such as InDesign. Fedora Account System Username: jonny
Updated to version 0.14.9, new SRPM URL: Spec URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile.spec SRPM URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile-0.14.9-1.fc36.src.rpm
Updated to version 0.14.10, new SRPM URL: Spec URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile.spec SRPM URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile-0.14.10-1.fc38.src.rpm
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6300310 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2149698-sile/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06300310-sile/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.
- Please use autochangelog/autorelease - Requires: libtexpdf = %{version} -> should include arch: Requires: libtexpdf%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} - Why is this bundled? Was it modified by the project? Provides: bundled(lua-lunamark) - Same question about libtexpdf %package -n libtexpdf Summary: bundled with SILE It seems that it is straight taken from another repo. Why don't you package it separately? Also that Summary is a no go. We don't care about the fact that it is bundled in the summary, the user needs to know what this package do. I saw https://github.com/sile-typesetter/libtexpdf/issues/25 and it seems there is no release tarball anymore, but you can still grab an archive from a commit. I saw this too https://github.com/sile-typesetter/libtexpdf/issues/3#issuecomment-1301767989 but there is a cmake script now and you only need zlib and libpng. Please consider it.
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #4) > - Please use autochangelog/autorelease I will update the spec. > - Requires: libtexpdf = %{version} > > -> should include arch: Yes, arch should also be included. > > > Requires: libtexpdf%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} > > - Why is this bundled? Was it modified by the project? I think it is extracted from Tex Live into its own git repo by the SILE team. This git repo have no releases. This git repo have only been integrated with SILE as a git submodule. > > Provides: bundled(lua-lunamark) > > - Same question about libtexpdf Seems like they are working on unbundling lunamark: https://github.com/sile-typesetter/sile/issues/669 > > %package -n libtexpdf > Summary: bundled with SILE > > It seems that it is straight taken from another repo. Why don't you package > it separately? > > Also that Summary is a no go. We don't care about the fact that it is > bundled in the summary, the user needs to know what this package do. That is a good point. > > I saw https://github.com/sile-typesetter/libtexpdf/issues/25 and it seems > there is no release tarball anymore, but you can still grab an archive from > a commit. > > I saw this too > https://github.com/sile-typesetter/libtexpdf/issues/3#issuecomment- > 1301767989 but there is a cmake script now and you only need zlib and libpng. > > Please consider it. I will try to package it directly from the commit that is used by SILE.
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #4) > I saw this too > https://github.com/sile-typesetter/libtexpdf/issues/3#issuecomment- > 1301767989 but there is a cmake script now and you only need zlib and libpng. Seems like cmake is broken in libtexpdf https://github.com/sile-typesetter/libtexpdf/issues/28
Do you have a sample of the SPEC you've written for libtexpdf?
Ok let's check this SPEC: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/libtexpdf/ It's based on the Meson PR on the repository. Check if it build with Sile.
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #7) > Do you have a sample of the SPEC you've written for libtexpdf? This was what I started with https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/libtexpdf.spec
Hey, upstream SILE and libtexpdf maintainer here. Long term I 100% agree that getting the libtexpdf projects split out into its own project is the goal we want to achieve, but we're not there yet. We already have it as a separate Git repository because we knew we wanted to allow it to be independent, but it really isn't there yet. To date it has no stand-alone releases and the Makefile even makes assumptions about being a submodule of the SILE repository. Until it has it's own releases and fully stand alone build system I would suggest just building with it being installed as part of the SILE package. As soon as it does have it's own tagged releases then a new package could provide the library and the SILE package could be changed to depend on it.
Based on the feedback from upstream, I would like to keep SILE and libtexpdf in the same spec/build. I updated SILE to the latest version 0.14.12 and made changes based on the review. Could you have another look? Spec URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile.spec SRPM URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile-0.14.12-1.fc38.src.rpm Build result: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jonny/SILE/build/6571793/
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6575034 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2149698-sile/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06575034-sile/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- 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.
Could you have a new look at this review Robert-André Mauchin please :)? It is the last package needed for SILE to work on Fedora.
Updated to version 0.14.14, new SRPM URL: Spec URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile.spec SRPM URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile-0.14.14-1.fc39.src.rpm COPR build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jonny/SILE/build/6822153/
Created attachment 2006254 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 6575034 to 6823507
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6823507 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2149698-sile/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06823507-sile/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- 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.
Updated to version 0.14.16, new SRPM URL: Spec URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile.spec SRPM URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile-0.14.16-1.fc39.src.rpm COPR build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jonny/SILE/build/6970514/
Updated to version 0.14.17, new SRPM URL: Spec URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile.spec SRPM URL: https://jonny.fedorapeople.org/sile-0.14.17-1.fc39.src.rpm COPR build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jonny/SILE/build/7000270/
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7000855 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2149698-sile/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07000855-sile/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- 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.
Created attachment 2015841 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 7000855 to 7000856
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7000856 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2149698-sile/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07000856-sile/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- 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.