Bug 2430590 - Review Request: gpib - user libraries, language bindings and documentation for the GPIB driver
Summary: Review Request: gpib - user libraries, language bindings and documentation fo...
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: http://linux-gpib.sourceforge.net/
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-NEEDSPONSOR
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2026-01-17 15:17 UTC by Michael Katzmann
Modified: 2026-04-11 16:37 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10032462 to 10224712 (4.41 KB, patch)
2026-03-14 04:50 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10224772 to 10226185 (2.76 KB, patch)
2026-03-14 19:27 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10226185 to 10232504 (2.03 KB, patch)
2026-03-17 00:01 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10232504 to 10268069 (1.88 KB, patch)
2026-03-27 21:11 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff

Description Michael Katzmann 2026-01-17 15:17:03 UTC
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/vk2bea/GPIB-User/fedora-43-x86_64/10025740-gpib/
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/vk2bea/GPIB-User/fedora-43-x86_64/10025740-gpib/

Description: 
User libraries, language bindings and documentation for the GPIB driver.
As of kernel 6.19, the linux kernel will include GPIB (General Purpose Interface Bus) drivers.
This package includes the user portion of the linux gpib project to enable programs to access devices on the GPIB and to configure GPIB controllers.
The GPIB is used to control electronic and scientific instruments and was originally created by Hewlett Packard as the HPIB in the early 1970's. The standard was formulated as IEEE 488.

Another package, gpib-firmware is required for some hardware that requires the loading of firmware. (some Agilent and National Instruments USB/GPIB controllers)

(n.b. For several years I have provided RPM packages on COPR for the GPIB driver (using dkms) and the user libraries, language bindings and documentation)

References:
Linux GPIB project - https://linux-gpib.sourceforge.io/
 

Fedora Account System Username: vk2bea

Comment 1 Michael Katzmann 2026-01-17 15:30:27 UTC
These are first packages I have proposed for inclusion in Fedora, so I am looking for a sponsor (per the instructions)

(the associated request for the inclusion of gpib-firmware is here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2430592)

Comment 2 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-18 03:05:58 UTC
Cannot find any valid SRPM URL for this ticket. Common causes are:

- You didn't specify `SRPM URL: ...` in the ticket description
  or any of your comments
- The URL schema isn't HTTP or HTTPS
- The SRPM package linked in your URL doesn't match the package name specified
  in the ticket summary


---
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 4 Fedora Review Service 2026-01-18 03:25:04 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10032462
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10032462-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Explicit dependency on perl-devel is not allowed unless building architecture-specific code which links to libperl.so
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/
- Package contains %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
  Read more: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782
- Not a valid SPDX expression 'GPLv2+'. It seems that you are using the old Fedora license abbreviations. Try `license-fedora2spdx' for converting it to SPDX.
  Read more: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SPDX_Licenses_Phase_1

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.

Comment 8 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 04:50:34 UTC
Created attachment 2133367 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10032462 to 10224712

Comment 9 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 04:50:37 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10224712
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10224712-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Explicit dependency on perl-devel is not allowed unless building architecture-specific code which links to libperl.so
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/
- Package contains %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
  Read more: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782

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.

Comment 10 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 05:24:42 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10224748
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10224748-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Explicit dependency on perl-devel is not allowed unless building architecture-specific code which links to libperl.so
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/
- Package contains %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
  Read more: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782

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.

Comment 11 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 05:34:50 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10224757
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10224757-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Explicit dependency on perl-devel is not allowed unless building architecture-specific code which links to libperl.so
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/
- Package contains %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
  Read more: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782

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.

Comment 12 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 05:39:21 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10224765
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10224765-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Explicit dependency on perl-devel is not allowed unless building architecture-specific code which links to libperl.so
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/
- Package contains %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
  Read more: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782

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.

Comment 13 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 05:47:47 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10224772
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10224772-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages
- Explicit dependency on perl-devel is not allowed unless building architecture-specific code which links to libperl.so
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Perl/
- Package contains %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
  Read more: https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/782

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.

Comment 15 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 19:27:16 UTC
Created attachment 2133418 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10224772 to 10226185

Comment 16 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-14 19:27:18 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10226185
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10226185-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages

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.

Comment 18 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-17 00:01:05 UTC
Created attachment 2133727 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10226185 to 10232504

Comment 19 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-17 00:01:08 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10232504
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10232504-gpib/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_devel_packages

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.

Comment 21 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-27 21:11:11 UTC
Created attachment 2135095 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 10232504 to 10268069

Comment 22 Fedora Review Service 2026-03-27 21:11:14 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10268069
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2430590-gpib/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10268069-gpib/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.


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