Bug 2350888 - Review Request: rust-g2p - To create types that implement fast finite field arithmetic
Summary: Review Request: rust-g2p - To create types that implement fast finite field a...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ben Beasley
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://crates.io/crates/g2p
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2350887
Blocks: 2350889
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-03-08 19:34 UTC by Fabio Valentini
Modified: 2025-03-22 18:32 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-03-22 18:32:56 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
code: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Fabio Valentini 2025-03-08 19:34:12 UTC
Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-g2p.spec
SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-g2p-1.1.0-1.fc41.src.rpm

Description:
A crate to create types that implement fast finite field arithmetic.

Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe

Comment 1 Ben Beasley 2025-03-17 10:24:29 UTC
The package looks basically good. Updating to 1.2.0 will allow you to stop
adding the license files as separate sources, and patching out benchmark-only
dev-dependencies on criterion, galois_2p8, and reed-solomon-erasure will allow
you to run the tests. Please submit an updated spec file and I should be able
to approve it promptly.


Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated

The spec file is generated by rust2rpm with some customization, simplifying the
review.

You can stop inserting the license files downstream when you update to 1.2.0:

  +# * https://github.com/WanzenBug/g2p/issues/9
  +Source2:        https://github.com/WanzenBug/g2p/raw/refs/tags/g2p-v1.1.0/LICENSE-APACHE
  +Source3:        https://github.com/WanzenBug/g2p/raw/refs/tags/g2p-v1.1.0/LICENSE-MIT
  
  +cp -pav %{SOURCE2} %{SOURCE3} .

The tests are skipped with

  -%bcond check 1
  +# * missing dev-dependencies: galois_2p8, reed-solomon-erasure
  +%bcond check 0

but it turns out that this is unnecessary since the missing dev-dependencies
are benchmark-only. If you patch out criterion, galois_2p8, and
reed-solomon-erasure from the dev-dependencies, you can run the tests without
further ado.


Issues:
=======
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
  Note: warning: File listed twice:
  /usr/share/cargo/registry/g2p-1.1.0/LICENSE-APACHE
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_duplicate_files

  This is due to reasonable design choices in rust2rpm and is not a serious
  problem.


===== MUST items =====

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", "*No copyright* Apache License (v2.0)
     or MIT license". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in
     /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[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.
[x]: 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]: 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]: 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 0 bytes in 0 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     rust-g2p-devel , rust-g2p+default-devel
[x]: Package functions as described.

     (tests would pass if they were enabled)

[!]: Latest version is packaged.
[!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.

     License files are correctly patched in from upstream, and this is
     necessary for 1.1.0; however, updating to 1.2.0 will make this
     unnecessary.

[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.

     Tests are disabled due to missing dev-dependencies, but the missing
     dependencies are all benchmark-only. Please patch them out and run the
     tests.

[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: rust-g2p-devel-1.1.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          rust-g2p+default-devel-1.1.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          rust-g2p-1.1.0-1.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/tmpilbr1v1h')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

rust-g2p+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 12 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 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: 2

rust-g2p+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 8 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/WanzenBug/g2p/raw/refs/tags/g2p-v1.1.0/LICENSE-MIT :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : df5b69b93e9516d81153ddcf97ef5f9c78c7001d62a11b93a218a9707adbcd78
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : df5b69b93e9516d81153ddcf97ef5f9c78c7001d62a11b93a218a9707adbcd78
https://github.com/WanzenBug/g2p/raw/refs/tags/g2p-v1.1.0/LICENSE-APACHE :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : d4fffe07c625a42ecc075dc41f0fc32a21ad165bfc8981baaa623188e559021b
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d4fffe07c625a42ecc075dc41f0fc32a21ad165bfc8981baaa623188e559021b
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/g2p/1.1.0/download#/g2p-1.1.0.crate :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 1a9afa6efed9af3a5a68ba066429c1497c299d4eafbd948fe630df47a8f2d29f
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1a9afa6efed9af3a5a68ba066429c1497c299d4eafbd948fe630df47a8f2d29f


Requires
--------
rust-g2p-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(g2gen/default) >= 1.1.0 with crate(g2gen/default) < 2.0.0~)
    (crate(g2poly/default) >= 1.1.0 with crate(g2poly/default) < 2.0.0~)
    cargo

rust-g2p+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(g2p)



Provides
--------
rust-g2p-devel:
    crate(g2p)
    rust-g2p-devel

rust-g2p+default-devel:
    crate(g2p/default)
    rust-g2p+default-devel



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2350888 -L qrdeps/
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, Python, SugarActivity, R, Perl, PHP, C/C++, Ocaml, fonts, Haskell
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Built with local dependencies:
    /home/ben/fedora/review/qrdeps/rust-g2poly+default-devel-1.1.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/qrdeps/rust-g2poly-devel-1.1.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/qrdeps/rust-g2gen+default-devel-1.1.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/qrdeps/rust-g2gen-devel-1.1.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm

Comment 2 Fabio Valentini 2025-03-21 13:00:39 UTC
Good catch about the fact that all missing dependencies are benchmark-only.
I went through all dev-dependencies and patched out all that are benchmark-specific, and enabled tests.

Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-g2p.spec
SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-g2p-1.2.0-1.fc42.src.rpm

koji scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=130562696

Comment 3 Fedora Review Service 2025-03-21 13:02:27 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8801367
(failed)

Build log:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2350888-rust-g2p/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08801367-rust-g2p/builder-live.log.gz

Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.

- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network
  unavailability), please ignore it.
- If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they
  are listed in the "Depends On" field


---
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 4 Ben Beasley 2025-03-21 14:48:04 UTC
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated

The spec file is almost exactly as generated by rust2rpm, simplifying the
review.

- Benchmark-only dependencies are patched out of the dev-dependencies. This is
  correct, useful, well-documented, and appropriate to do downstream-only.

Issues:
=======
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
  Note: warning: File listed twice:
  /usr/share/cargo/registry/g2p-1.2.0/LICENSE-APACHE
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_duplicate_files

  This is due to reasonable design choices in rust2rpm and is not a serious
  problem.

===== MUST items =====

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", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0",
     "MIT License", "*No copyright* Apache License (v2.0) or MIT license".
     6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/20250321/2350888-rust-g2p/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[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.
[x]: 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]: 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]: 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 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: 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).
[-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     rust-g2p-devel , rust-g2p+default-devel
[x]: Package functions as described.

     (tests pass)

[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.

     https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=130565647

[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: rust-g2p-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          rust-g2p+default-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          rust-g2p-1.2.0-1.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/tmp5lxepure')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

rust-g2p+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 12 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 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: 2

rust-g2p+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 8 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/g2p/1.2.0/download#/g2p-1.2.0.crate :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 5bce512b75277aca7d5e1a9efa4d2966b29b5da602af3e29a65e14dc210274ae
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5bce512b75277aca7d5e1a9efa4d2966b29b5da602af3e29a65e14dc210274ae


Requires
--------
rust-g2p-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(g2gen/default) >= 1.2.0 with crate(g2gen/default) < 2.0.0~)
    (crate(g2poly/default) >= 1.2.0 with crate(g2poly/default) < 2.0.0~)
    cargo
    rust

rust-g2p+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(g2p)



Provides
--------
rust-g2p-devel:
    crate(g2p)
    rust-g2p-devel

rust-g2p+default-devel:
    crate(g2p/default)
    rust-g2p+default-devel



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2350888 -L ../../qrdeps/
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: R, Ocaml, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, PHP, Python, Java, Perl, Haskell
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Built with local dependencies:
    /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/20250321/../../qrdeps/rust-g2gen+default-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/20250321/../../qrdeps/rust-g2gen-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/20250321/../../qrdeps/rust-g2poly+default-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/20250321/../../qrdeps/rust-g2poly-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/20250321/../../qrdeps/rust-g2p+default-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/2350888-rust-g2p/20250321/../../qrdeps/rust-g2p-devel-1.2.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm

Comment 5 Fabio Valentini 2025-03-22 17:32:08 UTC
Thank you for the review!

Comment 6 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2025-03-22 17:32:37 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-g2p

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2025-03-22 18:29:08 UTC
FEDORA-2025-c02c03c921 (rust-g2gen-1.2.1-1.fc43, rust-g2p-1.2.0-1.fc43, and 1 more) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-c02c03c921

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2025-03-22 18:32:56 UTC
FEDORA-2025-c02c03c921 (rust-g2gen-1.2.1-1.fc43, rust-g2p-1.2.0-1.fc43, and 1 more) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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