Spec URL: https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers.spec SRPM URL: https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-3.fc41.src.rpm Description: Official Direct3D 12 headers Fedora Account System Username: kwizart rpmlint: DirectX-Headers-devel.x86_64: E: lto-no-text-in-archive /usr/lib64/libDirectX-Guids.a DirectX-Headers-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/include/wsl/stubs/rpc.h /usr/include/wsl/stubs/oaidl.h:/usr/include/wsl/stubs/ocidl.h koji scratch build for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=129908882
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8737082 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2350442-directx-headers/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08737082-DirectX-Headers/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.
Previous review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2115560#c6 This package only provides a static archive and no shared libraries on purpose (along headers). This is because it aims to dlopen a complement shared object library at runtime that will be exposed by WSL on the Linux userspace (no need to distribute it). Because it's a static-only-archive with headers, I've pick the solution to drop a -devel sub-package that also provides -static without any "main" package. Packages using it (likely only mesa so far) can use a package independent method to select such dependency with pkgconfig(DirectX-Headers).
I plan to test this out in the next day or two and then I'll give it a review, thanks!
Copr https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/kwizart/wsl/builds/ Mesa merge request (rebased but without d3d12 enabled by default) https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mesa/pull-request/41 I will do some runtime tests later (on WSL W11 with Intel). Spec URL: https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers.spec SRPM URL: https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-4.fc41.src.rpm Description: Official Direct3D 12 headers Changelog: - Droped requires on non-existing main package from -devel
Created attachment 2079211 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8737082 to 8737140
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8737140 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2350442-directx-headers/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08737140-DirectX-Headers/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.
Don't these already exist as part of mingw-headers? I've been consuming them for dxvk-native, and it seems to be fine.
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #7) > Don't these already exist as part of mingw-headers? I've been consuming them > for dxvk-native, and it seems to be fine. mingw-headers does ship a set of DirectX headers it generates via the Wine IDL compiler from (I presume) the same interface definition. However, the headers from mingw-headers are older, missing a number of definitions from my totally random spot-check. These track https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/directx12agility/. Additionally, mingw-headers doesn't ship, for example, dxguids.h which Mesa depends on (and Mesa does explicitly depend on a recent version of this https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/mesa/-/blob/mesa-25.0.1/meson.build?ref_type=tags#L603). Also, as noted in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2115560#c6 this comes along with a couple static archives which contain some GUID definitions and format properties.
Okay, I've built Mesa with D3D12 support using this package, installed it in the Fedora WSL beta image, and can use it to run glxgears using an AMD and Nvidia GPU (and I can't imagine anyone wanting to do anything else). I needed to force Mesa to select it with GALLIUM_DRIVER=d3d12, but that's a problem to solve elsewhere. The specfile looks pretty good, just a few notes: - It would be good to include the note you left in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2115560#c6 regarding the debug package in the specfile where you disable it. - While I don't foresee Windows for s390x any time soon, the package _does_ build on all architectures. I would say drop the ExclusiveArch. Debian, for example, is building it for mips64 which feels equally as likely as s390x. - Do we need the case-insensitive provides? I couldn't find anything about it in the packaging guidelines. If not, I would say drop them. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jcline/devel/package-review/2350442-DirectX- Headers/licensecheck.txt [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [!]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [!]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if present. Note: Package has .a files: DirectX-Headers-devel. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 8692 bytes in 2 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Note: %define requiring justification: %define _lto_cflags %{nil} [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: DirectX-Headers-devel-1.615.0-4.fc43.x86_64.rpm DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-4.fc43.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp3at2woyu')] checks: 32, packages: 2 DirectX-Headers-devel.x86_64: E: lto-no-text-in-archive /usr/lib64/libDirectX-Guids.a DirectX-Headers-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/include/wsl/stubs/rpc.h /usr/include/wsl/stubs/oaidl.h:/usr/include/wsl/stubs/ocidl.h 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 1 DirectX-Headers-devel.x86_64: E: lto-no-text-in-archive /usr/lib64/libDirectX-Guids.a DirectX-Headers-devel.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/include/wsl/stubs/rpc.h /usr/include/wsl/stubs/oaidl.h:/usr/include/wsl/stubs/ocidl.h 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.2 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/microsoft/DirectX-Headers/archive/v1.615.0/DirectX-Headers-1.615.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 5394360b517f431949d751f3bcb4150313f28815aded514531c7aaea81bac314 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5394360b517f431949d751f3bcb4150313f28815aded514531c7aaea81bac314 Requires -------- DirectX-Headers-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config Provides -------- DirectX-Headers-devel: DirectX-Headers-devel DirectX-Headers-devel(x86-64) DirectX-Headers-static pkgconfig(DirectX-Headers) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/jcline/devel/package-review/2350442-DirectX-Headers/srpm/DirectX-Headers.spec 2025-03-12 09:14:55.733238160 -0400 +++ /home/jcline/devel/package-review/2350442-DirectX-Headers/srpm-unpacked/DirectX-Headers.spec 2025-03-05 19:00:00.000000000 -0500 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.7.3) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 4; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + %global debug_package %{nil} %global __strip /bin/true @@ -81,3 +91,22 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +## START: Generated by rpmautospec +* Thu Mar 06 2025 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart> - 1.615.0-4 +- Drop spurious provide + +* Thu Mar 06 2025 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart> - 1.615.0-3 +- Add comment + +* Thu Mar 06 2025 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart> - 1.615.0-1 +- Update to 1.615.0 + +* Thu Nov 28 2024 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart> - 1.614.1-1 +- Update to 1.614.1 + +* Fri Apr 12 2024 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart> - 1.613.1-1 +- Update to 1.613.1 + +* Mon Feb 26 2024 Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart> - 1.611.0-1 +- Initial spec file + +## END: Generated by rpmautospec Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2350442 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Perl, Java, R, SugarActivity, Python, Haskell, PHP, fonts, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Spec URL: https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers.spec SRPM URL: https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-5.fc41.src.rpm Description: Official Direct3D 12 headers Changelog: - Add comment about debug been disabled - Comment-out ExclusiveArch and update comment - Drop lower-case virtual provides Thanks for the review. About testing with d3d12 enabled in WSL2, it's worth to use glmark2-wayland (and alikes for Xwayland and/or es2 support). I've managed to test it on Intel Cometlake (gen9) with W11 (23/10 or something). It seems to faster than llvmpipe (not tried vaapi yet, but I don't think it's supported on my HW).
Created attachment 2080269 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 8737140 to 8769253
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8769253 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2350442-directx-headers/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08769253-DirectX-Headers/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.
(In reply to Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) from comment #10) > Spec URL: https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers.spec > SRPM URL: > https://dl.kwizart.net/review/DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-5.fc41.src.rpm > Description: Official Direct3D 12 headers > > Changelog: > - Add comment about debug been disabled > - Comment-out ExclusiveArch and update comment This introduces a warning because of the macro (which, in this case, probably doesn't expand into anything world-breaking, but who knows what the future holds). I'd personally drop the note entirely, but dropping or otherwise mangling the macro so that it doesn't expand is okay too. > - Drop lower-case virtual provides > > Thanks for the review. > > > About testing with d3d12 enabled in WSL2, it's worth to use glmark2-wayland > (and alikes for Xwayland and/or es2 support). > I've managed to test it on Intel Cometlake (gen9) with W11 (23/10 or > something). It seems to faster than llvmpipe (not tried vaapi yet, but I > don't think it's supported on my HW). Thanks, I plan to look at this a bit harder once the driver is built in Mesa. Other than the one rpmlint issue this looks good to me, thanks!
> This introduces a warning because of the macro (which, in this case, probably doesn't expand into anything world-breaking, but who knows what the future holds). I'd personally drop the note entirely, but dropping or otherwise mangling the macro so that it doesn't expand is okay too. Fixed locally by dropping the comment.
Sounds good. All my concerns are addressed, so I'm happy to approve this. Thanks!
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/DirectX-Headers
FEDORA-2025-56edff0507 (DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-56edff0507
FEDORA-2025-56edff0507 (DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-1d59bcb21b (DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-1d59bcb21b
FEDORA-2025-ae372879d6 (DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-ae372879d6
Everything is imported (for f41+). I've added you as co-maintainer. Thanks for the review Jeremy ! Next step is here: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mesa/pull-request/41 (just rebased).
FEDORA-2025-ae372879d6 has been pushed to the Fedora 41 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-ae372879d6 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-ae372879d6 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-1d59bcb21b 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-2025-1d59bcb21b \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-1d59bcb21b See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-1d59bcb21b (DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-ae372879d6 (DirectX-Headers-1.615.0-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.