Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/openvr/openvr.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/openvr/openvr-1.26.7-1.fc40.src.rpm Description: OpenVR is an API and runtime that allows access to VR hardware from multiple vendors without requiring that applications have specific knowledge of the hardware they are targeting. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=107752390
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6546431 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2244984-openvr/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06546431-openvr/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.
This is an unofficial review as I am currently still being sponsored. > openvr-api.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libopenvr_api.so libopenvr_api.so You should look into moving this library to a subdir of %{_libdir}. > - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. > Note: Documentation size is 7390917 bytes in 4 files. You should consider moving the docs to a dedicated docs subpackage. The docs folder seems to provide API documentation which could be placed in the api subpackage. Regarding the controller_callouts docs I wonder if the devel subpackage is the right subpackage to ship these. > %files devel > %license LICENSE As the devel subpackage requires the api subpackage the %license does not have to be included here again.
Thanks for the review! > You should look into moving this library to a subdir of %{_libdir}. That wouldn't work as this is a public library, if we move it other things linking to it wouldn't find it (short of messing with ld.so.conf, which isn't generally advisable). I'll see if I can patch the build system to make it versioned though, as unversioned .so aren't ideal. > You should consider moving the docs to a dedicated docs subpackage. The docs folder seems to provide API documentation which could be placed in the api subpackage. Regarding the controller_callouts docs I wonder if the devel subpackage is the right subpackage to ship these. I'll move these to a -doc subpackage. > As the devel subpackage requires the api subpackage the %license does not have to be included here again. Will remove, thanks.
Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/openvr/openvr.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/openvr/openvr-1.26.7-1.fc40.src.rpm Changelog: - add soversion to the library (matching the one upstream uses on macOS) - move docs to -doc subpackage - drop unnecessary license in -devel subpackage
Created attachment 1995349 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 6546431 to 6563267
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6563267 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2244984-openvr/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06563267-openvr/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.
Review notes: * Package follows Fedora Packaging Guidelines * Package builds and installs * Package licensing is correctly handled * No serious issues from rpmlint There is a minor spec fixup you should do when importing though: "%{_libdir}/libopenvr_api.so.1*" is too greedy. Use "%{_libdir}/libopenvr_api.so.1{,.*}" instead. PACKAGE APPROVED.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/openvr
FEDORA-2023-0d10f094a0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-0d10f094a0
FEDORA-2023-0d10f094a0 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-10af6b1e28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-10af6b1e28
FEDORA-2023-10af6b1e28 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-10af6b1e28 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-10af6b1e28 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-10af6b1e28 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.