Bug 2420441 - Review Request: rust-zlink-smol - zlink library for the smol runtime
Summary: Review Request: rust-zlink-smol - zlink library for the smol runtime
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ben Beasley
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://crates.io/crates/zlink-smol
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-12-09 08:39 UTC by Andreas Schneider
Modified: 2025-12-09 15:17 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-12-09 15:17:38 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
code: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Andreas Schneider 2025-12-09 08:39:34 UTC
Spec URL: https://asn.fedorapeople.org/rust-zlink-smol.spec
SRPM URL: https://asn.fedorapeople.org/rust-zlink-smol-0.2.0-1.fc44.src.rpm
Description: zlink library for the smol runtime
Fedora Account System Username: asn

This is a new dependency of rust-zlink.

Scratch-build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=139836001

rust2rpm.toml:

[features]
hide = [
    "defmt", # Not packaged
]

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2025-12-09 09:22:04 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9889202
(failed)

Build log:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2420441-rust-zlink-smol/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09889202-rust-zlink-smol/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.

Comment 2 Ben Beasley 2025-12-09 11:43:12 UTC
The submission appears to be based on a rust2rpm.toml that also has:

[features]
enable = [
    "tracing",
]

Is that what you intended? It seems harmless; I didn’t investigate whether it’s necessary, but I did notice it doesn’t match the rust2rpm.toml in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2420441#c0.

Comment 3 Andreas Schneider 2025-12-09 12:57:33 UTC
I manually added `-f tracing` to the spec file. Will add it to the rust2rpm.toml. Thanks.

Comment 4 Ben Beasley 2025-12-09 13:19:53 UTC
The package is APPROVED.

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated

The spec file is exactly as generated by rust2rpm.toml, except that the tracing
feature was enabled (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2420441#c3)
and rpmautospec macros have been expanded. This greatly simplifies the review.
I didn’t evaluate whether “-f tracing” was necessary (e.g. for running more
unit tests), but it isn’t harmful. It wouldn’t hurt to explain why you needed
to enable it in a rust2rpm.toml comment.

Issues:
=======
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
  Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/cargo/registry/zlink-
  smol-0.2.0/LICENSE
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_duplicate_files

  Not a serious problem; due to reasonable rust2rpm design decisions.


===== 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", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT
     License". 9 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2420441-rust-zlink-
     smol/licensecheck.txt
[x]: 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]: 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: No rpmlint messages.
[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-
     zlink-smol-devel , rust-zlink-smol+default-devel , rust-zlink-
     smol+idl-devel , rust-zlink-smol+idl-parse-devel , rust-zlink-
     smol+introspection-devel , rust-zlink-smol+proxy-devel , rust-zlink-
     smol+server-devel , rust-zlink-smol+tracing-devel
[?]: Package functions as described.

     Tests are correctly built and run, but the crate does not include any
     tests that can be run in the RPM build environment.

[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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.

     Tests are correctly built and run, but the crate does not include any
     tests that can be run in the RPM build environment.

[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:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see
     attached diff).
     See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: rust-zlink-smol-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol+default-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol+idl-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol+idl-parse-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol+introspection-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol+proxy-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol+server-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol+tracing-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          rust-zlink-smol-0.2.0-1.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/tmp9pqwtt5s')]
checks: 32, packages: 9

 9 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 49 filtered, 0 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: 8

 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 45 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/zlink-smol/0.2.0/download#/zlink-smol-0.2.0.crate :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 72ec157812fcde1a3f45fea27db5a6fa1868ecbf5e11644166ab4caf5e3546dd
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 72ec157812fcde1a3f45fea27db5a6fa1868ecbf5e11644166ab4caf5e3546dd


Requires
--------
rust-zlink-smol-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(async-broadcast/default) >= 0.7.0 with crate(async-broadcast/default) < 0.8.0~)
    (crate(async-channel/default) >= 2.3.0 with crate(async-channel/default) < 3.0.0~)
    (crate(async-io/default) >= 2.3.0 with crate(async-io/default) < 3.0.0~)
    (crate(futures-lite/default) >= 2.5.0 with crate(futures-lite/default) < 3.0.0~)
    (crate(futures-util) >= 0.3.31 with crate(futures-util) < 0.4.0~)
    (crate(futures-util/alloc) >= 0.3.31 with crate(futures-util/alloc) < 0.4.0~)
    (crate(futures-util/async-await) >= 0.3.31 with crate(futures-util/async-await) < 0.4.0~)
    (crate(pin-project-lite/default) >= 0.2.0 with crate(pin-project-lite/default) < 0.3.0~)
    cargo
    crate(zlink-core)
    crate(zlink-core/std)
    rust

rust-zlink-smol+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(zlink-smol)

rust-zlink-smol+idl-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(zlink-core/idl)
    crate(zlink-smol)

rust-zlink-smol+idl-parse-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(zlink-core/idl-parse)
    crate(zlink-smol)

rust-zlink-smol+introspection-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(zlink-core/introspection)
    crate(zlink-smol)

rust-zlink-smol+proxy-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(zlink-core/proxy)
    crate(zlink-smol)

rust-zlink-smol+server-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(zlink-core/server)
    crate(zlink-smol)

rust-zlink-smol+tracing-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    cargo
    crate(zlink-core/tracing)
    crate(zlink-smol)



Provides
--------
rust-zlink-smol-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol)
    rust-zlink-smol-devel

rust-zlink-smol+default-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol/default)
    rust-zlink-smol+default-devel

rust-zlink-smol+idl-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol/idl)
    rust-zlink-smol+idl-devel

rust-zlink-smol+idl-parse-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol/idl-parse)
    rust-zlink-smol+idl-parse-devel

rust-zlink-smol+introspection-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol/introspection)
    rust-zlink-smol+introspection-devel

rust-zlink-smol+proxy-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol/proxy)
    rust-zlink-smol+proxy-devel

rust-zlink-smol+server-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol/server)
    rust-zlink-smol+server-devel

rust-zlink-smol+tracing-devel:
    crate(zlink-smol/tracing)
    rust-zlink-smol+tracing-devel



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/ben/fedora/review/2420441-rust-zlink-smol/srpm/rust-zlink-smol.spec	2025-12-09 11:30:30.707812794 +0000
+++ /home/ben/fedora/review/2420441-rust-zlink-smol/srpm-unpacked/rust-zlink-smol.spec	2025-12-08 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -1,2 +1,12 @@
+## START: Set by rpmautospec
+## (rpmautospec version 0.8.3)
+## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog
+%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua:
+    release_number = 1;
+    base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}"));
+    print(release_number + base_release_number - 1);
+}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}}
+## END: Set by rpmautospec
+
 # Generated by rust2rpm 28
 %bcond check 1
@@ -138,3 +148,7 @@
 
 %changelog
-%autochangelog
+## START: Generated by rpmautospec
+* Mon Dec 08 2025 Andreas Schneider <asn> - 0.2.0-1
+- Initial package version 0.2.0
+- https://github.com/z-galaxy/zlink/releases/tag/zlink-0.2.0
+## END: Generated by rpmautospec


Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2420441 -L zlink-smol-deps/
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Haskell, R, PHP, Java, Perl, C/C++, Python, fonts, Ocaml
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Built with local dependencies:
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+bytes-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+chrono-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+default-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+idl-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+idl-parse-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+indexmap-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+introspection-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+proxy-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+server-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+std-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+time-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+tracing-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+url-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core+uuid-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-core-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-macros+default-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-macros+idl-parse-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-macros+introspection-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-macros+proxy-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-macros+std-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
    /home/ben/fedora/review/zlink-smol-deps/rust-zlink-macros-devel-0.2.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm

===

Recommended post-import rust-sig tasks:

- set up package on release-monitoring.org:
  project: $crate
  homepage: https://crates.io/crates/$crate
  backend: crates.io
  version scheme: semantic
  version filter (*NOT* pre-release filter): alpha;beta;rc;pre
  distro: Fedora
  Package: rust-$crate

- add @rust-sig with "commit" access as package co-maintainer
  (should happen automatically)

- set bugzilla assignee overrides to @rust-sig (optional)

- track package in koschei for all built branches
  (should happen automatically once rust-sig is co-maintainer)

Comment 5 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2025-12-09 13:28:58 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-zlink-smol

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2025-12-09 15:14:27 UTC
FEDORA-2025-d6cc8e6f05 (rust-zlink-0.2.0-1.fc44, rust-zlink-core-0.2.0-1.fc44, and 3 more) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-d6cc8e6f05

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2025-12-09 15:17:38 UTC
FEDORA-2025-d6cc8e6f05 (rust-zlink-0.2.0-1.fc44, rust-zlink-core-0.2.0-1.fc44, and 3 more) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.