spec: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza.spec srpm: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc43.src.rpm koji: n/a copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/terjeros/eza/build/9782326/ user: terjeros note: See also copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/terjeros/eza/
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9783614 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2413750-rust-eza/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09783614-rust-eza/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.
Good day, Fabio Valentini told me you opened this review request. I was in touch with him cause I was trying to resume the rust-eza package, but I was not aware of your effort on this. I will help you with the review request. I will be back as soon as possible
Hello, can you check again all the dependencies and make a new build? Most of the changes in eza-fix-metadata.diff no longer apply / are no longer needed
Thanks for feedback and sorry for late reply! Updated package: spec: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza.spec srpm: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc43.src.rpm koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=141219460
Created attachment 2122550 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9783614 to 10032459
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10032459 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2413750-rust-eza/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10032459-rust-eza/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - License file EUPL-1.2.txt is not marked as %license Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text - A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-eza Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names Please know that there can be false-positives. --- 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.
Updated package: spec: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza.spec srpm: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc43.src.rpm koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=141263304
Created attachment 2122579 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 10032459 to 10032932
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10032932 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2413750-rust-eza/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10032932-rust-eza/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - License file MIT.txt is not marked as %license Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text - A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-eza Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names Please know that there can be false-positives. --- 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.
One more iteration: spec: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza.spec srpm: https://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/rust-eza/rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc43.src.rpm koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=141271568
Hi, anything specific blocking the review now?
Package approved. I added you among maintainers of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-eza Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not contain duplicates in %files. Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/cargo/registry/eza-0.23.4/CHANGELOG.md See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_duplicate_files - Package does not use a name that already exists. Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-eza See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names ===== 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", "European Union Public License, Version 1.2", "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0", "European Union Public License, Version 1.2 and/or MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License". 11 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/caterpillar/canc/rust-eza/licensecheck.txt [-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. [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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 90938 bytes in 7 files. [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 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]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in eza , rust-eza-devel , rust-eza+default-devel , rust-eza+git-devel , rust- eza+git2-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. [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]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: eza-0.23.4-1.fc45.x86_64.rpm rust-eza-devel-0.23.4-1.fc45.noarch.rpm rust-eza+default-devel-0.23.4-1.fc45.noarch.rpm rust-eza+git-devel-0.23.4-1.fc45.noarch.rpm rust-eza+git2-devel-0.23.4-1.fc45.noarch.rpm rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc45.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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/tmp5th9yc0m')] checks: 32, packages: 6 eza.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/licenses/eza/LICENSE.txt /usr/share/licenses/eza/EUPL-1.2.txt 6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 29 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.5 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 eza.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/licenses/eza/LICENSE.txt /usr/share/licenses/eza/EUPL-1.2.txt 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 25 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/eza/0.23.4/download#/eza-0.23.4.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 52c71cb11f7aa50bf4fd56f4cf58d05acb087f09cb99258396aec12b18ab2e25 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 52c71cb11f7aa50bf4fd56f4cf58d05acb087f09cb99258396aec12b18ab2e25 Requires -------- eza (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.2.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) rust-eza-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(ansi-width/default) >= 0.1.0 with crate(ansi-width/default) < 0.2.0~) (crate(backtrace/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(backtrace/default) < 0.4.0~) (crate(chrono) >= 0.4.40 with crate(chrono) < 0.5.0~) (crate(chrono/clock) >= 0.4.40 with crate(chrono/clock) < 0.5.0~) (crate(dirs/default) >= 6.0.0 with crate(dirs/default) < 7.0.0~) (crate(glob/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(glob/default) < 0.4.0~) (crate(libc/default) >= 0.2.0 with crate(libc/default) < 0.3.0~) (crate(locale/default) >= 0.2.0 with crate(locale/default) < 0.3.0~) (crate(log/default) >= 0.4.0 with crate(log/default) < 0.5.0~) (crate(natord-plus-plus/default) >= 2.0.0 with crate(natord-plus-plus/default) < 3.0.0~) (crate(nu-ansi-term/default) >= 0.50.1 with crate(nu-ansi-term/default) < 0.51.0~) (crate(nu-ansi-term/derive_serde_style) >= 0.50.1 with crate(nu-ansi-term/derive_serde_style) < 0.51.0~) (crate(nu-ansi-term/serde) >= 0.50.1 with crate(nu-ansi-term/serde) < 0.51.0~) (crate(number_prefix/default) >= 0.4.0 with crate(number_prefix/default) < 0.5.0~) (crate(palette) >= 0.7.5 with crate(palette) < 0.8.0~) (crate(palette/std) >= 0.7.5 with crate(palette/std) < 0.8.0~) (crate(path-clean/default) >= 1.0.1 with crate(path-clean/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(percent-encoding/default) >= 2.3.1 with crate(percent-encoding/default) < 3.0.0~) (crate(phf/default) >= 0.13.1 with crate(phf/default) < 0.14.0~) (crate(phf/macros) >= 0.13.1 with crate(phf/macros) < 0.14.0~) (crate(plist) >= 1.7.0 with crate(plist) < 2.0.0~) (crate(proc-mounts/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(proc-mounts/default) < 0.4.0~) (crate(rayon/default) >= 1.10.0 with crate(rayon/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(serde/default) >= 1.0.219 with crate(serde/default) < 2.0.0~) (crate(serde/derive) >= 1.0.219 with crate(serde/derive) < 2.0.0~) (crate(serde_norway/default) >= 0.9.0 with crate(serde_norway/default) < 0.10.0~) (crate(terminal_size/default) >= 0.4.2 with crate(terminal_size/default) < 0.5.0~) (crate(timeago) >= 0.4.2 with crate(timeago) < 0.5.0~) (crate(unicode-width/default) >= 0.2.0 with crate(unicode-width/default) < 0.3.0~) (crate(uutils_term_grid/default) >= 0.6.0 with crate(uutils_term_grid/default) < 0.7.0~) (crate(uzers/default) >= 0.12.1 with crate(uzers/default) < 0.13.0~) cargo rust rust-eza+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(eza) crate(eza/git) rust-eza+git-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(eza) crate(eza/git2) rust-eza+git2-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(git2) >= 0.20.0 with crate(git2) < 0.21.0~) cargo crate(eza) Provides -------- eza: eza eza(x86-64) rust-eza-devel: crate(eza) rust-eza-devel rust-eza+default-devel: crate(eza/default) rust-eza+default-devel rust-eza+git-devel: crate(eza/git) rust-eza+git-devel rust-eza+git2-devel: crate(eza/git2) rust-eza+git2-devel Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -rn rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc43.src.rpm -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Haskell, PHP, SugarActivity, Ocaml, R, Java, Perl, fonts, C/C++, Python Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Unretirement requested https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/82114
FEDORA-2026-b9362e696a (rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc45) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 45. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-b9362e696a
FEDORA-2026-22b9da40f9 (rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-22b9da40f9
FEDORA-2026-b9362e696a (rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc45) has been pushed to the Fedora 45 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2026-dee45013d4 has been pushed to the Fedora 44 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-dee45013d4` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-dee45013d4 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2026-22b9da40f9 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-22b9da40f9` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-22b9da40f9 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2026-dee45013d4 (rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2026-22b9da40f9 (rust-eza-0.23.4-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.