Spec URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/SDL3_ttf.spec SRPM URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/SDL3_ttf-3.2.0-1.fc43.src.rpm Description: This library is a wrapper around the FreeType and Harfbuzz libraries, allowing you to use TrueType fonts to render text in SDL applications. Fedora Account System Username: slaanesh
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8773220 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2352900-sdl3_ttf/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08773220-SDL3_ttf/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.
Based on the output of "licensecheck -r SDL3_ttf-3.2.0" and the fact that the license is just the sum of the files used in the binary RPM, I think I got the license right this time. Side tags with SDL3 3.2.8, needed for build, in it: f42-build-side-107980 f41-build-side-107982 f40-build-side-107984
Both plutovg and plutosvg dependencies are in updates-testing.
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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "zlib License", "*No copyright* Freetype Project License and/or MIT License and/or zlib License", "Boost Software License 1.0", "mit_whatever", "MIT License and/or The Unlicense", "*No copyright* zlib License", "Khronos License and/or zlib License", "MIT License and/or zlib License", "Khronos License and/or MIT License", "MIT License", "Apache License 2.0", "Khronos License". 110 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/sdl3_ttf/2352900- SDL3_ttf/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. [!]: 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. [ ]: 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]: 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 1993 bytes in 2 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 SDL3_ttf-samples [ ]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. [ ]: 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. [ ]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: 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]: 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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: SDL3_ttf-3.2.0-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm SDL3_ttf-devel-3.2.0-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm SDL3_ttf-samples-3.2.0-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm SDL3_ttf-3.2.0-1.fc43.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-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/tmpfaff42r_')] checks: 32, packages: 4 SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/CHANGES.txt SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/README.md SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary glfont SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary showfont SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary testapp SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary testgputext SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-documentation SDL3_ttf.spec: W: no-%check-section 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings, 19 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.6 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: SDL3_ttf-samples-debuginfo-3.2.0-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm SDL3_ttf-debuginfo-3.2.0-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpf_vuc3qj')] checks: 32, packages: 2 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 22 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 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: 5 SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/CHANGES.txt SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/README.md SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary glfont SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary showfont SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary testapp SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary testgputext SDL3_ttf-samples.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings, 42 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 1.6 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/releases/download/release-3.2.0/SDL3_ttf-3.2.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 9a741defb7c7d6dff658d402cb1cc46c1409a20df00949e1572eb9043102eb62 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 9a741defb7c7d6dff658d402cb1cc46c1409a20df00949e1572eb9043102eb62 Requires -------- SDL3_ttf (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libSDL3.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3.so.0(SDL3_0.0.0)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libharfbuzz.so.0()(64bit) libplutosvg.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) SDL3_ttf-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config SDL3-devel(x86-64) SDL3_ttf(x86-64) cmake-filesystem(x86-64) libSDL3_ttf.so.0()(64bit) pkgconfig(freetype2) pkgconfig(harfbuzz) pkgconfig(plutosvg) pkgconfig(sdl3) SDL3_ttf-samples (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libOpenGL.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3.so.0(SDL3_0.0.0)(64bit) libSDL3_ttf.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3_ttf.so.0(SDL3_ttf_0.0.0)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- SDL3_ttf: SDL3_ttf SDL3_ttf(x86-64) libSDL3_ttf.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3_ttf.so.0(SDL3_ttf_0.0.0)(64bit) SDL3_ttf-devel: SDL3_ttf-devel SDL3_ttf-devel(x86-64) cmake(SDL3_ttf) cmake(sdl3_ttf) pkgconfig(sdl3-ttf) SDL3_ttf-samples: SDL3_ttf-samples SDL3_ttf-samples(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2352900 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Haskell, Ocaml, R, Python, fonts, Perl, PHP, Java Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) Please list contents of %{_bindir}, they should not be globbed as would not want to have conflicts when doing an upgrade. The binaries are glfont, showfont, testapp and testgputext which have generic names In particular testapp is also provided by golang-github-nbutton23-zxcvbn-0:0.1-16.20210110gite56b841.fc41.x86_64 zimg-devel-0:3.0.5-3.fc41.i686 zimg-devel-0:3.0.5-3.fc41.x86_64 b) https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/docs/hello.c https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/examples/editbox.c https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/examples/editbox.h are under a different license c) Perhaps a smoke test can be added: https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/.github/workflows/main.yml#L114-L117 d) Please package latest release 3.2.2
Issue on generic names: https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/issues/546
Extremely sorry for the delay. I had a really busy time at work / private life. Will pick this up again immediately. Thanks.
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #4) > a) Please list contents of %{_bindir}, they should not be globbed as would > not want to > have conflicts when doing an upgrade. > The binaries are glfont, showfont, testapp and testgputext which have > generic names > In particular testapp is also provided by > golang-github-nbutton23-zxcvbn-0:0.1-16.20210110gite56b841.fc41.x86_64 > zimg-devel-0:3.0.5-3.fc41.i686 > zimg-devel-0:3.0.5-3.fc41.x86_64 Thank you very much for https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/issues/546! I backported the official commit that moves all the test binaries in /usr/libexec/insalled-tests. This means the samples subpackage has been dropped, and the files are just part of -devel. Regarding the globbing, no single package owns /usr/libexec/insalled-tests, and every package shipping stuff inside there it's owning directly the directory /usr/libexec/insalled-tests and downwards, so I did the same. > b) > https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/docs/hello.c > https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/examples/editbox.c > https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/examples/editbox.h > > are under a different license That example is not packaged, so we don't need to declare the license. Anyway it should be covered by MIT, as per the SDL3_image review. > c) Perhaps a smoke test can be added: > https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/blob/main/.github/workflows/main. > yml#L114-L117 Done. > d) Please package latest release 3.2.2 Done. Spec URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/SDL3_ttf.spec SRPM URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/SDL3_ttf-3.2.2-1.fc42.src.rpm
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9056219 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2352900-sdl3_ttf/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09056219-SDL3_ttf/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.
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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. 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", "zlib License", "*No copyright* Freetype Project License and/or MIT License and/or zlib License", "Boost Software License 1.0", "mit_whatever", "MIT License and/or The Unlicense", "*No copyright* zlib License", "Khronos License and/or zlib License", "MIT License and/or zlib License", "Khronos License and/or MIT License", "MIT License", "Apache License 2.0", "Khronos License". 102 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/sdl3_ttf/2352900- SDL3_ttf/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]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/libexec/installed- tests(gspell-tests, flatpak-tests, gjs-tests, gtksourceview4-tests, gdk-pixbuf2-tests, json-glib-tests, ibus-anthy-tests, ibus-table- tests, libipuz-tests, gtksourceview5-tests, flatpak-xdg-utils-tests, graphene-tests, ibus-engine-gui-ci, flatpak-builder-tests, ibus-tests, ibus-typing-booster-tests, ostree-tests, gtk3-tests, glib2-tests, cjs- tests, ibus-hangul-tests) [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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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 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]: 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 2033 bytes in 2 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). [ ]: Package functions as described. [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. [ ]: %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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: SDL3_ttf-3.2.2-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm SDL3_ttf-devel-3.2.2-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm SDL3_ttf-3.2.2-1.fc43.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-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/tmpq6iz2na8')] checks: 32, packages: 3 SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/CHANGES.txt SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/README.md 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 17 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.6 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: SDL3_ttf-debuginfo-3.2.2-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm SDL3_ttf-devel-debuginfo-3.2.2-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp_d0iozad')] checks: 32, packages: 2 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 22 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 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: 4 SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/CHANGES.txt SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/README.md 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 39 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 1.7 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/libsdl-org/SDL_ttf/releases/download/release-3.2.2/SDL3_ttf-3.2.2.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 63547d58d0185c833213885b635a2c0548201cc8f301e6587c0be1a67e1e045d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 63547d58d0185c833213885b635a2c0548201cc8f301e6587c0be1a67e1e045d Requires -------- SDL3_ttf (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libSDL3.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3.so.0(SDL3_0.0.0)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libfreetype.so.6()(64bit) libharfbuzz.so.0()(64bit) libplutosvg.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) SDL3_ttf-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config SDL3-devel(x86-64) SDL3_ttf(x86-64) cmake-filesystem(x86-64) libOpenGL.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3.so.0(SDL3_0.0.0)(64bit) libSDL3_ttf.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3_ttf.so.0(SDL3_ttf_0.0.0)(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) pkgconfig(freetype2) pkgconfig(harfbuzz) pkgconfig(plutosvg) pkgconfig(sdl3) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- SDL3_ttf: SDL3_ttf SDL3_ttf(x86-64) libSDL3_ttf.so.0()(64bit) libSDL3_ttf.so.0(SDL3_ttf_0.0.0)(64bit) SDL3_ttf-devel: SDL3_ttf-devel SDL3_ttf-devel(x86-64) cmake(SDL3_ttf) cmake(sdl3_ttf) pkgconfig(sdl3-ttf) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2352900 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Ocaml, PHP, fonts, Perl, Java, SugarActivity, Python, R, Haskell Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) Consider packaging some of the files in the docs directory, in particular docs/README-versions.md docs/README-migration.md b) Use dos2unix to prevent: SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/CHANGES.txt SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/README.md c) Consider changing %{_libexecdir}/installed-tests to %dir %{_libexecdir}/installed-tests %{_libexecdir}/installed-tests/SDL3_ttf to prevent accidental installation in future upgrades. d) Koji build https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=132958181 e) Approved. Consider implementing non-blocking changes.
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #9) > a) Consider packaging some of the files in the docs directory, in particular > docs/README-versions.md > docs/README-migration.md I've added README-migration.md which seems relevant to the -devel subpackage. The README-migration.md seems a leftover document from the 2.x era, so I did not add this one. > b) Use dos2unix to prevent: > SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/CHANGES.txt > SDL3_ttf.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > /usr/share/doc/SDL3_ttf/README.md Done, also added dos2unix as a dependency. > c) Consider changing > > %{_libexecdir}/installed-tests > > to > > %dir %{_libexecdir}/installed-tests > %{_libexecdir}/installed-tests/SDL3_ttf > > to prevent accidental installation in future upgrades. Done. > e) Approved. Consider implementing non-blocking changes. Thanks for the (long) review!
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/SDL3_ttf
(In reply to Simone Caronni from comment #10) > I've added README-migration.md which seems relevant to the -devel > subpackage. The README-migration.md seems a leftover document from the 2.x > era, so I did not add this one. I meant the README-versions.md is a leftover...
FEDORA-2025-0e9a557e33 (SDL3_ttf-3.2.2-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-0e9a557e33
FEDORA-2025-c3c62c3747 (SDL3_ttf-3.2.2-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-c3c62c3747
FEDORA-2025-c3c62c3747 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-c3c62c3747 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-c3c62c3747 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-0e9a557e33 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-2025-0e9a557e33 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-0e9a557e33 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-0e9a557e33 (SDL3_ttf-3.2.2-1.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-c3c62c3747 (SDL3_ttf-3.2.2-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.