Spec URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/sprout.spec SRPM URL: https://ngompa.fedorapeople.org/for-review/sprout-0.0.26-1.fc43.src.rpm Description: Programmable UEFI bootloader written in Rust. Fedora Account System Username: ngompa
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9865673 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2418814-sprout/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09865673-sprout/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.
[fedora-review-service-build]
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9887685 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2418814-sprout/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09887685-sprout/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.
Taking this review. Package looks pretty straightforward, just a few (very) minor things that aren't really blockers but just things I'd like to have clarified before approving: 1) IMO "written in Rust" is not very useful to put into "Summary" or %description. Consider just dropping it. 2) I assume that you might want to eventually also have a "signed" variant of sprout-unsigned-$arch? Is this why you already added Provides / Conflicts "%{name}-bootloader-%{efi_arch}"? 3) Is there a typo in "%{name}%{efi_arch}.efi"? Maybe not, it looks like grub also uses the "grubx64.efi" file name ...
(In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #4) > Taking this review. > > Package looks pretty straightforward, just a few (very) minor things that > aren't really blockers but just things I'd like to have clarified before > approving: > > 1) IMO "written in Rust" is not very useful to put into "Summary" or > %description. Consider just dropping it. > Yeah, I'll drop it on import. > 2) I assume that you might want to eventually also have a "signed" variant > of sprout-unsigned-$arch? > Is this why you already added Provides / Conflicts > "%{name}-bootloader-%{efi_arch}"? > Yep. > 3) Is there a typo in "%{name}%{efi_arch}.efi"? Maybe not, it looks like > grub also uses the "grubx64.efi" file name ... It's not a typo, that's how I will be installing it.
Thanks, that's all good enough for me. Package APPROVED. This is *almost* entirely a boilerplate Rust application package (except for building for the UEFI target), which simplifies the review: ✅ package contains only permissible content ✅ package builds and installs without errors on rawhide 🫤 test suite is run and all unit tests pass: There appear to be no Rust unit tests in the project, so not having a %check section or pulling in dev-dependencies is fine. ✅ latest version of the project is packaged ✅ license matches upstream specification and is acceptable for Fedora ✅ licenses of statically linked dependencies are correctly taken into account ✅ license file is included with %license in %files ✅ package complies with (Rust) Packaging Guidelines Package APPROVED. === Recommended post-import tasks: - set up package on release-monitoring.org: - add @rust-sig with "commit" access as package co-maintainer - track package in koschei for all built branches (should happen automatically once / if rust-sig becomes co-maintainer)
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/sprout
FEDORA-2025-27087a7c49 (rust-jaarg-0.2.2-1.fc43 and sprout-0.0.26-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-27087a7c49
FEDORA-2025-5eee654113 (rust-jaarg-0.2.2-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-5eee654113
FEDORA-2025-5eee654113 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-2025-5eee654113 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-5eee654113 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-27087a7c49 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-27087a7c49 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-27087a7c49 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2025-5eee654113 (rust-jaarg-0.2.2-1.fc42 and sprout-0.0.26-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2025-27087a7c49 (rust-jaarg-0.2.2-1.fc43 and sprout-0.0.26-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.