Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-protobuf-parse.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-protobuf-parse-3.7.2-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: Parse `.proto` files. Files are parsed into a `protobuf::descriptor::FileDescriptorSet` object using either: * pure rust parser (no dependencies) * `protoc` binary (more reliable and compatible with Google's implementation). Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9587417 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2397168-rust-protobuf-parse/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09587417-rust-protobuf-parse/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.
rust2rpm.toml config file: ``` [package] summary = "Parse .proto files" cargo-install-bin = false [requires] test = ["/usr/bin/protoc"] [tests] skip = [ "test_against_protobuf_protos::test", "test_bundled_google_proto_files_consistent", "test_bundled_rustproto_proto_consistent", ] skip-exact = true comments = ["skip some tests that check for consistency with C++ protobuf"] ```
Successful COPR build for all architectures with dependencies available (rust-protobuf-support (new), rust-protobuf v3): https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/decathorpe/rust-protobuf-v3/
We have license = "MIT" in Cargo.toml.orig and License: MIT in rust-protobuf-parse.spec, but LICENSE.txt indicates that the .proto files in src/proto/google are BSD-3-Clause, so it appears we should have license = "MIT AND BSD-3-Clause".
Good catch. It looks like these .proto files all have the BSD-3-Clause license text embedded, so at least that is covered already. I've amended the Cargo.toml license filed (and in turn, the License tag in the spec file) to reflect this ("MIT AND BSD-3-Clause"). Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-protobuf-parse.spec SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/rust-protobuf-parse-3.7.2-1.fc42.src.rpm
Created attachment 2107680 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9587417 to 9603594
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9603594 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2397168-rust-protobuf-parse/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09603594-rust-protobuf-parse/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.
Thanks, this looks fine now! Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/cargo/registry/protobuf- parse-3.7.2/LICENSE.txt See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_duplicate_files This is not a serious problem; it is due to reasonable design decisions in rust2rpm. ===== 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", "BSD 3-Clause License and/or MIT License", "BSD 3-Clause License". 34 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2397168-rust-protobuf- parse/20250926/2397168-rust-protobuf-parse/licensecheck.txt The license field in Cargo.toml and the License field in the spec file correctly reflect the licenses of the .proto files. You may consider suggesting this change upstream. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: 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- protobuf-parse-devel , rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel [x]: 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. https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/decathorpe/rust-protobuf-v3/build/9587422/ [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-protobuf-parse-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-protobuf-parse-3.7.2-1.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/tmp4ea7j1fj')] checks: 32, packages: 3 rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('FileDescriptorSet', '%description -l en_US FileDescriptorSet -> Descriptiveness') rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('protoc', '%description -l en_US protoc -> proton, protocol, proctor') rust-protobuf-parse.src: E: spelling-error ('FileDescriptorSet', '%description -l en_US FileDescriptorSet -> Descriptiveness') rust-protobuf-parse.src: E: spelling-error ('protoc', '%description -l en_US protoc -> proton, protocol, proctor') rust-protobuf-parse-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('FileDescriptorSet', '%description -l en_US FileDescriptorSet -> Descriptiveness') 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 0 warnings, 13 filtered, 5 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: 2 rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('FileDescriptorSet', '%description -l en_US FileDescriptorSet -> Descriptiveness') rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('protoc', '%description -l en_US protoc -> proton, protocol, proctor') rust-protobuf-parse-devel.noarch: E: spelling-error ('FileDescriptorSet', '%description -l en_US FileDescriptorSet -> Descriptiveness') 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 0 warnings, 9 filtered, 3 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/protobuf-parse/3.7.2/download#/protobuf-parse-3.7.2.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b4aeaa1f2460f1d348eeaeed86aea999ce98c1bded6f089ff8514c9d9dbdc973 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b4aeaa1f2460f1d348eeaeed86aea999ce98c1bded6f089ff8514c9d9dbdc973 Requires -------- rust-protobuf-parse-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(anyhow/default) >= 1.0.53 with crate(anyhow/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(indexmap/default) >= 2.0.0 with crate(indexmap/default) < 3.0.0~) (crate(log/default) >= 0.4.0 with crate(log/default) < 0.5.0~) (crate(tempfile/default) >= 3.2.0 with crate(tempfile/default) < 4.0.0~) (crate(thiserror/default) >= 1.0.30 with crate(thiserror/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(which/default) >= 4.0.0 with crate(which/default) < 5.0.0~) cargo crate(protobuf-support/default) crate(protobuf/default) rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(protobuf-parse) Provides -------- rust-protobuf-parse-devel: crate(protobuf-parse) rust-protobuf-parse-devel rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel: crate(protobuf-parse/default) rust-protobuf-parse+default-devel Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2397168 -L /home/ben/fedora/review/protobuf-deps/ Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Haskell, C/C++, Perl, PHP, fonts, Python, Java, SugarActivity, R, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Built with local dependencies: /home/ben/fedora/review/protobuf-deps/rust-protobuf-support+default-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm /home/ben/fedora/review/protobuf-deps/rust-protobuf-support-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm /home/ben/fedora/review/protobuf-deps/rust-protobuf-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm /home/ben/fedora/review/protobuf-deps/rust-protobuf+bytes-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm /home/ben/fedora/review/protobuf-deps/rust-protobuf+default-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm /home/ben/fedora/review/protobuf-deps/rust-protobuf+with-bytes-devel-3.7.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
Thanks a lot for the review!
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-protobuf-parse
Imported and built: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-41d833fe83