Bug 2249395 - Review Request: 86box - Emulator of x86-based machines based on PCem.
Summary: Review Request: 86box - Emulator of x86-based machines based on PCem.
Keywords:
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Artur Frenszek-Iwicki
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://86box.net
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-11-12 19:40 UTC by Luna Lâm Puvilland
Modified: 2026-01-05 20:36 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:
ppisar: fedora-review?


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8028511 to 9976318 (834 bytes, patch)
2026-01-05 18:17 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9976318 to 9976486 (936 bytes, patch)
2026-01-05 20:08 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9976486 to 9976532 (458 bytes, patch)
2026-01-05 20:36 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff

Description Luna Lâm Puvilland 2023-11-12 19:40:21 UTC
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/86box/blob/master/f/86box.spec
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/leo/86box/srpm-builds/06626902/86Box-4.0.1-1.src.rpm
Description: Emulator of x86-based machines based on PCem. 
Fedora Account System Username: leo

Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=108946263

Comment 1 Artur Frenszek-Iwicki 2023-11-14 18:43:40 UTC
> Spec URL: https://pagure.io/86box/blob/master/f/86box.spec
This leads to a syntax-highlighted HTML rendition of the spec. Please use "raw file" links.

> License:	GPLv2+
Old Callaway-style tag. The SPDX equivalent of this is "GPL-2.0-or-later".
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_valid_license_short_names

> %ifarch i386 x86_64
It'd probably be safer to use the "%{ix86}" macro here instead of just "i386".

>   %ifarch arm aarch64
Same here - use the "%{arm32}" macro to check for 32-bit ARM architectures.

>   mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/${i}x${i}/apps
> ...
> desktop-file-install --dir=%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications src/unix/assets/net.86box.86Box.desktop
Mixed use of %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. Please pick one and stick with it.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_using_buildroot_and_optflags_vs_rpm_build_root_and_rpm_opt_flags

Comment 2 Luna Lâm Puvilland 2023-11-15 05:27:14 UTC
Fixed these issues.
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/86box/raw/master/f/86box.spec
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/leo/86box/srpm-builds/06637672/86Box-4.0.1-1.src.rpm
Description: Emulator of x86-based machines based on PCem. 
Fedora Account System Username: leo

Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=109051593

Comment 3 Luna Lâm Puvilland 2023-11-15 06:16:17 UTC
Whoops, wrong spec URL.
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/86box/raw/master/f/86Box.spec
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/leo/86box/srpm-builds/06637672/86Box-4.0.1-1.src.rpm
Description: Emulator of x86-based machines based on PCem. 
Fedora Account System Username: leo

Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=109051593

Comment 4 Artur Frenszek-Iwicki 2024-03-17 16:55:50 UTC
Hi Leo, could you update this to v4.1?
https://github.com/86Box/86Box/releases/tag/v4.1

Comment 5 Artur Frenszek-Iwicki 2024-08-12 18:31:28 UTC
Leo, are you still interested in packaging this?

Comment 6 Luna Lâm Puvilland 2024-08-19 02:12:39 UTC
Apologies. Will update ASAP.

Comment 8 Artur Frenszek-Iwicki 2024-08-20 11:36:15 UTC
> Version:	4.1
v4.2 is now available.
https://github.com/86Box/86Box/releases/tag/v4.2

> cp src/unix/assets/${i}x${i}/net.86box.86Box.png %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/${i}x${i}/apps
> [...]
> cp src/unix/assets/net.86box.86Box.metainfo.xml %{buildroot}%{_metainfodir}
Please use `cp -p` or `install -p` to preserve timestamps.
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_timestamps

Comment 10 Fedora Review Service 2024-09-17 18:28:42 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8028511
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2249395-86box/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08028511-86Box/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.

Comment 11 Artur Frenszek-Iwicki 2025-08-22 16:09:50 UTC
Leo, are you still interested in getting this into Fedora?
Could you reupload the SRPM somewhere? The copr build is no longer available.
(Also, v4.2.1 is now out.)

Comment 12 Luna Lâm Puvilland 2026-01-05 18:00:56 UTC
My apologies for the extended delay on this. Here is the update.
Updated to v5.3

Spec URL: https://pagure.io/86box/raw/master/f/86Box.spec
SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/leo/86box/srpm-builds/09976311/86Box-5.3-1.src.rpm
Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=140774381

Comment 13 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-05 18:17:20 UTC
Created attachment 2121231 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8028511 to 9976318

Comment 14 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-05 18:17:23 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9976318
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2249395-86box/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09976318-86Box/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.

Comment 15 nucleo 2026-01-05 18:48:49 UTC
An it be built with USE_QT6?

Comment 17 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-05 20:08:08 UTC
Created attachment 2121233 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9976318 to 9976486

Comment 18 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-05 20:08:10 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9976486
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2249395-86box/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09976486-86Box/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.

Comment 19 Luna Lâm Puvilland 2026-01-05 20:14:30 UTC
Fixed a typo in the spec for aarch64 and other non-x86_64 architectures, where it wasn't using QT6 properly.


Spec URL: https://pagure.io/86box/raw/master/f/86Box.spec
SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/leo/86box/srpm-builds/09976525/86Box-5.3-1.src.rpm
Koji Build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=140776481

Comment 20 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-05 20:36:09 UTC
Created attachment 2121234 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9976486 to 9976532

Comment 21 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-05 20:36:12 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9976532
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2249395-86box/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09976532-86Box/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.


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