Spec URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/rust-cargo-rpmstatus.spec SRPM URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.2-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: Cargo-tree for RPM packaging. Fedora Account System Username: pemensik
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125899823
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8269315 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2326609-rust-cargo-rpmstatus/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08269315-rust-cargo-rpmstatus/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/ Please know that there can be false-positives. --- 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.
> # (MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND Unicode-DFS-2016 > # 0BSD OR MIT OR Apache-2.0 > # Apache-2.0 OR BSL-1.0 > # Apache-2.0 OR ISC OR MIT > # Apache-2.0 OR MIT > # Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT > # BSD-2-Clause OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT > # BSD-3-Clause > # GPL-3.0 > # ISC > # ISC AND MIT AND OpenSSL > # MIT > # MIT OR Apache-2.0 > # MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR Zlib > # MIT OR Zlib OR Apache-2.0 > # MPL-2.0 > # Unlicense OR MIT > # Zlib OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT > License: GPL-3.0 AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-3-Clause AND ISC AND MIT AND OpenSSL AND MIT AND MPL-2.0 This is - sadly - not what the Licensing guidelines tell us to do here. The "OR" choices need to be preserved and cannot be simplified away. Only duplicated "(A OR B)" and "(B OR A)" can be dropped since the order does not matter, but nothing else. There are also non-OR'd licenses missing from the expression, like Unicode-DFS-2016. What happened to that one?
Oh, It would make it somehow long. Since every part should be combined by AND together, I expect ((MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND Unicode-DFS-2016) AND (Apache-2.0 OR MIT) AND (MIT OR Apache-2.0) would result in: (MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND Unicode-DFS-2016 Then also (MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR Zlib) AND (MIT OR Zlib OR Apache-2.0) => (MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR Zlib) If I have to keep all OR in place, just few duplicates can be omitted. What I got as a result then: # (MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND Unicode-DFS-2016 # [1] # 0BSD OR MIT OR Apache-2.0 # Apache-2.0 OR BSL-1.0 # Apache-2.0 OR ISC OR MIT # Apache-2.0 OR MIT # [2] (dup 1!) # Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT # BSD-2-Clause OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT # BSD-3-Clause # GPL-3.0 # ISC # ISC AND MIT AND OpenSSL # MIT # MIT OR Apache-2.0 # (dup 1,2!) # MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR Zlib # [3] # MIT OR Zlib OR Apache-2.0 # (dup 3!) # MPL-2.0 # Unlicense OR MIT # Zlib OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT # (dup 3!) License: (MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND Unicode-DFS-2016 AND (0BSD OR MIT OR Apache-2.0) AND (Apache-2.0 OR BSL-1.0) AND (Apache-2.0 OR ISC OR MIT) AND (Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT) AND (BSD-2-Clause OR Apache-2.0 OR MIT) AND BSD-3-Clause AND GPL-3.0 AND ISC AND MIT AND OpenSSL AND (MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR Zlib) AND MPL-2.0 AND (Unlicense OR MIT) Thought about putting single licenses first and sorting OR parts to have identical ordering, but that would make even less understandable how I got the final string of licenses. I guess ability to verify the source if these is more important than sorting used licenses. I wish there was a tool sorting separate OR or AND separated parts alphabetically when making this summary. Especially when I would have to watch differences in those on rebases, where dependencies might change as well. And Unicode-DFS-2016 was simply omitted by mistake from the original list. Yes, it definitely must be present there, my mistake!
It needs also bzip2 metadata update, builds fine with rust-bzip2-devel 0.5.2-1.fc43 when allowed. Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pemensik/cargo-rpmstatus/refs/heads/fedora/rust-cargo-rpmstatus.spec SRPM URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.2-1.fc42.src.rpm
Oh, wrong srpm url. Once again. Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pemensik/cargo-rpmstatus/refs/heads/fedora/rust-cargo-rpmstatus.spec SRPM URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.2-3.fc43.src.rpm
Oh, wrong srpm url, again! Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pemensik/cargo-rpmstatus/refs/heads/fedora/rust-cargo-rpmstatus.spec SRPM URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/srpm/rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.2-3.fc43.src.rpm
Strange, I had to delete ~/.cache/cargo-rpmstatus/rawhide/primary_db.sqlite and ~/.cache/cargo-rpmstatus/rawhide/repomd.xml to get it downloaded again. Then, it seems to work somehow. But not at first try...
Looks like the URLs are still the wrong ones? I downloaded the spec and the SRPM from the most recent comment and they don't match. The spec file looks up-to-date, but the SRPM is not? Other than that, package looks pretty good, but I'll do the final checks when I can do a test build from an SRPM that is actually current :) Note that this is not allowed: > gzip %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/%{crate}.* Just put the plain uncompressed filed into %_mandir, it will be compressed by a postinstall hook automatically.
try this ryst2rpm.toml, worked for me ``` [scripts] install.post = [ "# set up man pages", "mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1", "cp ./cargo-rpmstatus.1 %{buildroot}/%{_mandir}/man1",] [tests] skip = [ "db::tests::online_check_version_reqs"] comments = [ "crate will attempt to connect to internet to run tests"] [package] cargo-toml-patch-comments = [ "bump bzip version bounds"] extra-files = [ "%{_mandir}/man1/cargo-rpmstatus.1*"] ```
Spec URL: https://solomoncyj.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-cargo-rpmstatus/rust-cargo-rpmstatus.spec SRPM URL: https://solomoncyj.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rust-cargo-rpmstatus/rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.2-1.fc42.src.rpm - Uncommitted changes
hi, @Petr, The review seems to be stalled, and a response is needed from you soon
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pemensik/cargo-rpmstatus/refs/heads/fedora/rust-cargo-rpmstatus.spec SRPM URL: https://pemensik.fedorapeople.org/srpm/rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.3-1.fc43.src.rpm Okay, I have used my own rust2rpm: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pemensik/cargo-rpmstatus/refs/heads/fedora/rust2rpm.toml But modified it a bit to be more like yours. Just removed gzip step from man page. I install man page with -p parameter, which is mandatory AFAIK.
Oh and updated to 2.2.3 release done in the mean time, which does not need metadata fixing anymore.
Sorry for the delay - package looks good to me now, with two minor things that you should please fix before import: 1. Update the License tag. The dependency tree in rawhide has shifted since you ran the last build. (I would also suggest *not* to annotate the output of %cargo_license_summary in the spec file comment, it makes it hard to "diff" when pasting the updated one from the build log.) 2. Remove `%doc` from `%doc %{_mandir}/man1/%{crate}.1*`. It is redundant, man pages are automatically marked as `%doc`. PACKAGE APPROVED. === Package was generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review. ✅ package contains only permissible content ✅ package builds and installs without errors on rawhide ✅ test suite is run and all unit tests pass (tests requiring internet connectivity skipped) ✅ latest version of the crate is packaged ✅ license matches upstream specification and is acceptable for Fedora ✅ licenses of statically linked dependencies are correctly taken into account ✅ license files are included with %license in %files ✅ package complies with Rust Packaging Guidelines Package APPROVED. === Recommended post-import rust-sig tasks: - set up package on release-monitoring.org: project: $crate homepage: https://crates.io/crates/$crate backend: crates.io version scheme: semantic version filter (*NOT* pre-release filter): alpha;beta;rc;pre distro: Fedora Package: rust-$crate - set bugzilla assignee overrides to @rust-sig (optional)
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-cargo-rpmstatus
FEDORA-2025-22e26b4ff9 (rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.3-2.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-22e26b4ff9
FEDORA-2025-22e26b4ff9 (rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.3-2.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-f0729d57d0 (rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.3-2.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-f0729d57d0
FEDORA-2025-b4e6333b91 (rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.3-2.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-b4e6333b91
FEDORA-2025-b4e6333b91 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-b4e6333b91 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-b4e6333b91 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-f0729d57d0 has been pushed to the Fedora 42 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-f0729d57d0 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-f0729d57d0 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-b4e6333b91 (rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.3-2.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-f0729d57d0 (rust-cargo-rpmstatus-0.2.3-2.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.