Spec URL: https://github.com/dm0-/copr-firecracker/raw/fedora/rust-versionize_derive.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/dm0-/copr-firecracker/raw/fedora/rust-versionize_derive-0.1.5-1.fc37.src.rpm Description: Implements the Versionize derive proc macro. Fedora Account System Username: dm0 This is a dependency of Firecracker. The spec is automatically generated.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5696277 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2181033-rust-versionize_derive/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05696277-rust-versionize_derive/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.
Package fails to build. The crate uses "dangerous" open-upwards version requirements for its dependencies - i.e. "syn >= 1.0.13" also matches "syn 2.0.0" (which is now in Fedora), which is very likely not what the upstream developer intended. You should probably replace all ">=" requirements in Cargo.toml with "^" or remove them (which is equivalent), and submit this patch upstream.
It looks like this was done already, but it wasn't published to crates.io: https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/versionize_derive/commit/55fccd6001946c47185d0d05b19fef11779ce543 The crate seems to be used nontrivially, and there are a lot of breaking changes: https://github.com/dtolnay/syn/releases/tag/2.0.0 Is a rust-syn1.0 package acceptable in rawhide if I backport that commit?
(In reply to fedora.dm0 from comment #3) > It looks like this was done already, but it wasn't published to crates.io: > https://github.com/firecracker-microvm/versionize_derive/commit/ > 55fccd6001946c47185d0d05b19fef11779ce543 Oh, perfect. :) > The crate seems to be used nontrivially, and there are a lot of breaking > changes: https://github.com/dtolnay/syn/releases/tag/2.0.0 > > Is a rust-syn1.0 package acceptable in rawhide if I backport that commit? Look what I found: :) https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-syn1 It's already stable in rawhide, and in "testing" for other branches: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-1f10607303 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-6c1d08e931 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-4b82d41463 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-73cf527d8d BTW, the names for Rust compat packages are based on SemVer compatibility guarantees, so it's rust-syn1, not rust-syn1.0. The "rust2rpm --compat" flag I recently implemented should do "the right thing" (TM).
I've updated this package to drop coverage_config* files, and note the SRPM URL has a new version. The new version fixes the dependency ranges.
Package looks good to me. Just please add ad small comment about what the patch does (something like "prevent files that are only useful for upstream development from getting installed"). === Package was generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review. - package builds and installs without errors on rawhide - test suite is run and all unit tests pass - latest version of the crate is packaged - license matches upstream specification (Apache-2.0) and is acceptable for Fedora - license file is included with %license in %files - package complies with Rust Packaging Guidelines Package APPROVED. === Recommended post-import rust-sig tasks: - add @rust-sig with "commit" access as package co-maintainer - set bugzilla assignee overrides to @rust-sig (optional) - set up package on release-monitoring.org: project: $crate homepage: https://crates.io/crates/$crate backend: crates.io version scheme: semantic version filter: alpha;beta;rc;pre distro: Fedora Package: rust-$crate - track package in koschei for all built branches
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-versionize_derive
FEDORA-2023-cd313b8aef has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-cd313b8aef
FEDORA-2023-cd313b8aef has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13
FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295
FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295 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-2023-a4085b6295 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.