Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage.spec SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage-18^20250525.g04f835a-1.fc43.src.rpm Description: genimage is a tool to generate multiple filesystem and flash/disk images from a given root filesystem tree. genimage is intended to be run in a fakeroot environment. It also supports creating flash/disk images out of different file-system images and files. Fedora Account System Username: yaneti
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9078157 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2368438-genimage/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09078157-genimage/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.
- Recent snapshot Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage.spec SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage-18^20250527.ge035be8-1.fc43.src.rpm
Created attachment 2091694 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9078157 to 9092127
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9092127 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2368438-genimage/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09092127-genimage/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.
I am not currently sponsored as a packager so I can't assign/approve this, but am performing reviews to learn more about the guidelines and process. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - test suite is not run in %check ===== 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]: 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 successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [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: "*No copyright* GNU General Public License, Version 2", "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later". 126 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr- rpmbuild/results/genimage/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. [-]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 31928 bytes in 1 files. [!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [-]: 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. [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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. Note: %define requiring justification: %define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: [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. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Rpmlint ------- Checking: genimage-18^20250527.ge035be8-1.fc43.x86_64.rpm genimage-18^20250527.ge035be8-1.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/tmpc5lr8371')] checks: 32, packages: 2 genimage.src: E: spelling-error ('fakeroot', '%description -l en_US fakeroot -> fake root, fake-root, faker') genimage.x86_64: E: spelling-error ('fakeroot', '%description -l en_US fakeroot -> fake root, fake-root, faker') genimage.spec: W: no-%check-section 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings, 11 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.4 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: genimage-debuginfo-18^20250527.ge035be8-1.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/tmpb4tb2rst')] checks: 32, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- (none): E: there is no installed rpm "genimage". ============================ 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 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s (none): E: there is no installed rpm "genimage-debuginfo". There are no files to process nor additional arguments. Nothing to do, aborting. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/pengutronix/genimage//archive/e035be8e05bfe71755cda3b721d5f94c4a9087f6/genimage-18^20250527.ge035be8.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0f8898fd1d17a6b535dbec0951576ed2c6bd845fa0aaf5e749a086503726007e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0f8898fd1d17a6b535dbec0951576ed2c6bd845fa0aaf5e749a086503726007e Requires -------- genimage (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libconfuse.so.2()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- genimage: genimage genimage(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name genimage --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic Disabled plugins: Java, Ocaml, Haskell, Perl, fonts, SugarActivity, PHP, R, Python Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Thanks for looking into it - make check and some additional BR for it Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage.spec SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage-18^20250527.ge035be8-2.fc43.src.rpm
Created attachment 2091799 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9092127 to 9093814
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9093814 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2368438-genimage/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09093814-genimage/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.
- Recent snapshot Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage.spec SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage-18^20250603.gd816d0d-1.fc43.src.rpm
Created attachment 2092839 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9093814 to 9125998
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9125998 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2368438-genimage/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09125998-genimage/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.
- Use more filesystem/block tools for tests and recommend them Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage.spec SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage-18^20250603.gd816d0d-2.fc43.src.rpm
Created attachment 2092863 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9125998 to 9128209
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9128209 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2368438-genimage/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09128209-genimage/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.
- Skip erofs-tools for now https://github.com/pengutronix/genimage/issues/299 Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage.spec SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage-18^20250603.gd816d0d-3.fc43.src.rpm
Created attachment 2092864 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9128209 to 9128280
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9128280 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2368438-genimage/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09128280-genimage/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.
> # workaround for util-linux not shipping the mkcramfs old name > export TMPPATH=`mktemp -d` > ln -s /usr/bin/mkfs.cramfs $TMPPATH/mkcramfs > export PATH=$PATH:$TMPPATH > make check This also affects the installed package, it would be good to get this changed upstream.
At runtime one can always override with --mkcramfs. But upstream actually agreed to rename the default tool name for cramfs. yay! - New snapshot. mkcramfs workaround no longer required Spec URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage.spec SRPM URL: http://declera.com/~yaneti/genimage/genimage-18^20250611.g2593189-1.fc43.src.rpm
Created attachment 2093697 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9128280 to 9153853
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9153853 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2368438-genimage/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09153853-genimage/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.