Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dorinda/rust-virglrenderer/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09915109-rust-virglrenderer/rust-virglrenderer.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dorinda/rust-virglrenderer/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09915109-rust-virglrenderer/rust-virglrenderer-0.1.3-1.fc44.src.rpm Description: Safe and idiomatic Rust wrapper for virglrenderer Fedora Account System Username: dorinda
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9915305 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2422784-rust-virglrenderer/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09915305-rust-virglrenderer/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.
Hi @dbassey, could you attach the rust2rpm.toml file? thanks
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dorinda/rust-virglrenderer/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09940761-rust-virglrenderer/rust-virglrenderer.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dorinda/rust-virglrenderer/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09940761-rust-virglrenderer/rust-virglrenderer-0.1.3-1.fc44.src.rpm
Created attachment 2119648 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9915305 to 9940768
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9940768 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2422784-rust-virglrenderer/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09940768-rust-virglrenderer/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.
No issues found; the package is APPROVED. The package is rust2rpm 28, with custom toml file ---- 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) ---- 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/virglrenderer-0.1.3/LICENSE 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* MIT License", "MIT License". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/elmarco/pkg/2422784-rust- virglrenderer/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. [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. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [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: [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 rust- virglrenderer-devel , rust-virglrenderer+default-devel , rust- virglrenderer+virgl_renderer_unstable-devel [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: rust-virglrenderer-devel-0.1.3-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-virglrenderer+default-devel-0.1.3-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-virglrenderer+virgl_renderer_unstable-devel-0.1.3-1.fc44.noarch.rpm rust-virglrenderer-0.1.3-1.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/tmpd02hisk9')] checks: 32, packages: 4 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 19 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 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: 3 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 15 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/virglrenderer/0.1.3/download#/virglrenderer-0.1.3.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6906bec0a34658c4a81933153a784f9f8d8bcdbe67dcf9e58ea7b67fd1f8ec0b CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6906bec0a34658c4a81933153a784f9f8d8bcdbe67dcf9e58ea7b67fd1f8ec0b Requires -------- rust-virglrenderer-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (crate(libc/default) >= 0.2.177 with crate(libc/default) < 0.3.0~) (crate(log/default) >= 0.4.27 with crate(log/default) < 0.5.0~) (crate(thiserror/default) >= 2.0.12 with crate(thiserror/default) < 3.0.0~) (crate(virglrenderer-sys/default) >= 0.1.3 with crate(virglrenderer-sys/default) < 0.2.0~) cargo pkgconfig(virglrenderer) rust-virglrenderer+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(virglrenderer) crate(virglrenderer/virgl_renderer_unstable) rust-virglrenderer+virgl_renderer_unstable-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cargo crate(virglrenderer) Provides -------- rust-virglrenderer-devel: crate(virglrenderer) rust-virglrenderer-devel rust-virglrenderer+default-devel: crate(virglrenderer/default) rust-virglrenderer+default-devel rust-virglrenderer+virgl_renderer_unstable-devel: crate(virglrenderer/virgl_renderer_unstable) rust-virglrenderer+virgl_renderer_unstable-devel Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2422784 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Haskell, C/C++, SugarActivity, Java, Python, PHP, fonts, R, Perl, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-virglrenderer
FEDORA-2025-5172c25f15 (rust-virglrenderer-0.1.3-1.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-5172c25f15
FEDORA-2025-5172c25f15 (rust-virglrenderer-0.1.3-1.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please address some minor issue with this package: - The package doesn't document the downstream patch. Relaxing the dependency from libc 1.0.0-alpha to 0.2 should be fine, but please document what the patch does and why this is necessary. - The Build/Requires for `pkgconfig(virglrenderer)` are superfluous. This is already pulled in transitively via the package for the virglrenderer-sys crate. (- It looks like you used a rust2rpm.toml config file - if it is non-empty after removing the superfluous Build/Requires from the point above, please also import it into dist-git, otherwise it's just lost and writing the config file was pointless.)
Thanks! I addressed them. removing needinfo now.