Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-fastbloom.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-fastbloom-0.9.0-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: The fastest Bloom filter in Rust. No accuracy compromises. Compatible with any hasher. Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe
Looking at https://crates.io/crates/quinn-proto/0.11.13/dependencies, it appears that the latest quinn-proto works with the current fastbloom 0.14. Can we package that, or is there still a reason we need to start at 0.9?
Thanks for taking a look. quinn 0.11.13 adds some more new / updated dependencies on top of the two new ones in 0.11.12: - qlog (new, but optional) - rustls-platform-verifier v0.5 -> v0.6 - hex-literal v0.4 -> v1 - rcgen v0.13 -> v0.14 None of these look trivial, so I would prefer to do the quinn updates incrementally (i.e. 0.11.11 -> 0.11.12 now, 0.11.12 -> 0.11.13 later).
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated The spec file is exactly as generated by rust2rpm (for version 0.9), greatly simplifying the review. Issues: ======= - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.9.0/LICENSE-APACHE See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_duplicate_files This is not a serious problem and is due to reasonable design decisions in rust2rpm. - There is one test failure on i686: failures: ---- tests::test_seeded_hash_from_hashes_depth stdout ---- thread 'tests::test_seeded_hash_from_hashes_depth' panicked at src/lib.rs:688:13: 9168 deviates from 10000 note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace failures: tests::test_seeded_hash_from_hashes_depth https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=137770047 Since nobody really needs to use this on i686, but it’s inconvenient to have Rust library packages that are ExcludeArch, skipping this patch on 32-bit architectures is probably the most reasonable way forward. - There are some source and documentation files with CRLF (DOS/Windows style) line terminations: rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.9.0/src/lib.rs rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.9.0/README.md Consider fixing these with "dos2unix --keepdate". ===== 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* MIT License". 11 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2382068-rust-fastbloom/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- fastbloom-devel , rust-fastbloom+default-devel , rust-fastbloom+rand- devel , rust-fastbloom+serde-devel [x]: Package functions as described. (Tests pass.) [!]: Latest version is packaged. Packaging an older version for now is adequately justified in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2382068#c2. [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. [!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. One test fails on i686. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=137770047 [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-fastbloom-devel-0.9.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom+default-devel-0.9.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom+rand-devel-0.9.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom+serde-devel-0.9.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom-0.9.0-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpb4q6v81k')] checks: 32, packages: 5 rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.9.0/src/lib.rs rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.9.0/README.md rust-fastbloom+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+rand-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+serde-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom.src: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 1 warnings, 25 filtered, 6 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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 rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.9.0/src/lib.rs rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.9.0/README.md rust-fastbloom+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+rand-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+serde-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 1 warnings, 21 filtered, 5 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/fastbloom/0.9.0/download#/fastbloom-0.9.0.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 27cea6e7f512d43b098939ff4d5a5d6fe3db07971e1d05176fe26c642d33f5b8 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 27cea6e7f512d43b098939ff4d5a5d6fe3db07971e1d05176fe26c642d33f5b8 Requires -------- rust-fastbloom-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(getrandom/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(getrandom/default) < 0.4.0~) (crate(siphasher/default) >= 1.0.0 with crate(siphasher/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(wide/default) >= 0.7.15 with crate(wide/default) < 0.8.0~) cargo rust rust-fastbloom+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(fastbloom) crate(fastbloom/rand) rust-fastbloom+rand-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(rand/default) >= 0.9.0 with crate(rand/default) < 0.10.0~) cargo crate(fastbloom) rust-fastbloom+serde-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(serde/default) >= 1.0.203 with crate(serde/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(serde/derive) >= 1.0.203 with crate(serde/derive) < 2.0.0~) (crate(siphasher/serde_std) >= 1.0.0 with crate(siphasher/serde_std) < 2.0.0~) cargo crate(fastbloom) Provides -------- rust-fastbloom-devel: crate(fastbloom) rust-fastbloom-devel rust-fastbloom+default-devel: crate(fastbloom/default) rust-fastbloom+default-devel rust-fastbloom+rand-devel: crate(fastbloom/rand) rust-fastbloom+rand-devel rust-fastbloom+serde-devel: crate(fastbloom/serde) rust-fastbloom+serde-devel Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2382068 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Perl, Java, Haskell, Ocaml, fonts, SugarActivity, Python, C/C++, PHP, R Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Thank you for the review! >- There is one test failure on i686: > > failures: > ---- tests::test_seeded_hash_from_hashes_depth stdout ---- > thread 'tests::test_seeded_hash_from_hashes_depth' panicked at src/lib.rs:688:13: > 9168 deviates from 10000 > note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace > failures: > tests::test_seeded_hash_from_hashes_depth > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=137770047 I'll try to investigate this. It's quite possible that it's a harmless failure, but I'd like to know for sure.
I decided to just bite the sour apple and bump to the latest release / 0.14.0 since that is required by the latest quinn-proto anyway. And as it turns out, the i686 test failure is resolved by that bump, too. Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-fastbloom.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-fastbloom-0.14.0-1.fc43.src.rpm koji scratch build for rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=139108625
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9819838 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2382068-rust-fastbloom/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09819838-rust-fastbloom/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.
Hello, I do realize that this is possibly an old ticket. I am sorry that it hasn't been reviewed yet. Let me trigger the Fedora Review Service to see if the package builds successfully. Hopefully, a green check mark will attract some reviewer. If I am resurrecting an old ticket that you are not interested in anymore, my apologies, feel free to close it. [fedora-review-service-build]
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9820231 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2382068-rust-fastbloom/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09820231-rust-fastbloom/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 The spec file is generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review. The loom feature and optional dependency are removed (since loom is not packaged), and some CRLF-terminated files are fixed with dos2unix. Both changes are reasonable, well-documented, and OK to keep downstream-only. Issues: ======= - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/cargo/registry/fastbloom-0.14.0/LICENSE-APACHE See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_duplicate_files ===== 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* MIT License". 12 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2382068-rust-fastbloom/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. [-]: 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- fastbloom-devel , rust-fastbloom+default-devel , rust-fastbloom+rand- devel , rust-fastbloom+serde-devel , rust-fastbloom+std-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. [x]: 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=139181942 [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-fastbloom-devel-0.14.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom+default-devel-0.14.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom+rand-devel-0.14.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom+serde-devel-0.14.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom+std-devel-0.14.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-fastbloom-0.14.0-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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/tmplze7jayx')] checks: 32, packages: 6 rust-fastbloom+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+rand-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+serde-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+std-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom.src: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 0 warnings, 31 filtered, 6 badness; has taken 0.4 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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 rust-fastbloom+std-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+rand-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+serde-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') rust-fastbloom+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('hasher', '%description -l en_US hasher -> harsher, hashes, rasher') 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 warnings, 27 filtered, 5 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/fastbloom/0.14.0/download#/fastbloom-0.14.0.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 18c1ddb9231d8554c2d6bdf4cfaabf0c59251658c68b6c95cd52dd0c513a912a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 18c1ddb9231d8554c2d6bdf4cfaabf0c59251658c68b6c95cd52dd0c513a912a Requires -------- rust-fastbloom-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(getrandom/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(getrandom/default) < 0.4.0~) (crate(libm/default) >= 0.2.0 with crate(libm/default) < 0.3.0~) (crate(siphasher/default) >= 1.0.0 with crate(siphasher/default) < 2.0.0~) cargo rust rust-fastbloom+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(fastbloom) crate(fastbloom/rand) crate(fastbloom/std) rust-fastbloom+rand-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(rand/default) >= 0.9.0 with crate(rand/default) < 0.10.0~) cargo crate(fastbloom) rust-fastbloom+serde-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(serde/default) >= 1.0.203 with crate(serde/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(serde/derive) >= 1.0.203 with crate(serde/derive) < 2.0.0~) (crate(siphasher/serde_std) >= 1.0.0 with crate(siphasher/serde_std) < 2.0.0~) cargo crate(fastbloom) rust-fastbloom+std-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(fastbloom) Provides -------- rust-fastbloom-devel: crate(fastbloom) rust-fastbloom-devel rust-fastbloom+default-devel: crate(fastbloom/default) rust-fastbloom+default-devel rust-fastbloom+rand-devel: crate(fastbloom/rand) rust-fastbloom+rand-devel rust-fastbloom+serde-devel: crate(fastbloom/serde) rust-fastbloom+serde-devel rust-fastbloom+std-devel: crate(fastbloom/std) rust-fastbloom+std-devel Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2382068 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Java, Ocaml, Haskell, Python, R, SugarActivity, C/C++, Perl, PHP, fonts Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-fastbloom
Imported and built: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-6bf0928b2b