Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://codeberg.org/dherrerace/python-ml-dtypes-rpm/raw/branch/main/python-ml-dtypes.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dherrera/onnx-devel/srpm-builds/10550772/python-ml-dtypes-0.5.4-1.src.rpm Description: ml_dtypes is a stand-alone implementation of several NumPy dtype extensions used in machine learning. This is needed to update the onnx library to the latest version. Fedora Account System Username: dherrera
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10569904 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2484925-python-ml-dtypes/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10569904-python-ml-dtypes/fedora-review/review.txt Found issues: - Not a valid SPDX expression 'None'. 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.
Please, don't use pylint during the build, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_linters Using %pyproject_wheel without % pyproject_buildrequires is not supported. Also, > License: None > URL: None This is missing actual data. > %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{pypi_name}} This is not needed. > %description -n python3-%{pypi_name} > asdasdasd This feels like an error. > # Remove bundled egg-info > rm -rf %{pypi_name}.egg-info This is not needed. ---- Consider not using pyp2rpm at all, it creates oldfashioned Python specfiles. Converting them to %pyproject macro is then usually error prone. https://pypi.org/project/pyp2spec/ works quite nicely.
> export PYTHONPATH=%{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch} This is also not needed, %pytest does that.
(In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #2) > Consider not using pyp2rpm at all, it creates oldfashioned Python specfiles. > Converting them to %pyproject macro is then usually error prone. > https://pypi.org/project/pyp2spec/ works quite nicely. :O! didn't knew about the new tool! I'll make sure to regenerate using that one :D Thx for the tip. > Please, don't use pylint during the build, see > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_linters > > Using %pyproject_wheel without % pyproject_buildrequires is not supported. > Noted! it seems that pyp2spec did filter that one out correctly > > Also, > > > License: None > > URL: None > > This is missing actual data. Woops, my mistake! > > %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{pypi_name}} > > This is not needed. Fixed > > > %description -n python3-%{pypi_name} > > asdasdasd > > This feels like an error. It was an error! Thx for catching that one out xP > > # Remove bundled egg-info > > rm -rf %{pypi_name}.egg-info > > This is not needed. > Removed > > export PYTHONPATH=%{buildroot}%{python3_sitearch} > > This is also not needed, %pytest does that. Removed :thumbsup: ---- Spec URL: https://codeberg.org/dherrerace/python-ml-dtypes-rpm/raw/branch/main/python-ml-dtypes.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dherrera/onnx-devel/srpm-builds/10584187/python-ml-dtypes-0.5.4-3.src.rpm
Created attachment 2144881 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 10569904 to 10584194
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10584194 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2484925-python-ml-dtypes/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10584194-python-ml-dtypes/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.
Hi, I ran the fedora-review on the packages and it noted that the spec file has a patch file that isn't in the source RPM. The summary should not end in a period. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_dos_and_donts It looks like eigen3 is linked statically so the Build requires should be a eigen3-static not eigen3-devel. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static-libraries:~:text=Packages%20which%20explicitly%20need%20to%20link%20against%20the%20static%20version%20MUST%20BuildRequire%3A%20foo%2Dstatic%2C%20so%20that%20the%20usage%20can%20be%20tracked Consider adding a -l flag for pyproject_save_files https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#:~:text=Declare%20that%20a%20missing%20license%20should%20terminate%20the%20build%2E
(In reply to Withenoughcoffee from comment #7) > Hi, I ran the fedora-review on the packages and it noted that the spec file > has a patch file that isn't in the source RPM. > Yeah, my bad! The specfile link I provided was the head of the main branch where I was pushing changes, and I sent an extra commit to fix a failing test without updating this post's srpm... This time I locked the specific commit :thumbsup: > The summary should not end in a period. > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_dos_and_donts Fixed > It looks like eigen3 is linked statically so the Build requires should be a > eigen3-static not eigen3-devel. > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#packaging-static- > libraries:~: > text=Packages%20which%20explicitly%20need%20to%20link%20against%20the%20stati > c%20version%20MUST%20BuildRequire%3A%20foo%2Dstatic%2C%20so%20that%20the%20us > age%20can%20be%20tracked You are right! I thought that it didn't. Fixed > Consider adding a -l flag for pyproject_save_files > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#:~: > text=Declare%20that%20a%20missing%20license%20should%20terminate%20the%20buil > d%2E Done ;) --- Spec URL: https://codeberg.org/dherrerace/python-ml-dtypes-rpm/raw/commit/aa0768dfeab657e2db83278b3d6ed5d23fe63035/python-ml-dtypes.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/dherrera/onnx-devel/srpm-builds/10617749/python-ml-dtypes-0.5.4-5.src.rpm
Created attachment 2145929 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 10584194 to 10617869
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10617869 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2484925-python-ml-dtypes/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10617869-python-ml-dtypes/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.
Thank you for taking the time to make the fixes. The build requires change should have the replaced eigen3-devel with eigen3-static, not added it to the builds require. If we can get that fixed, everything else looks good. Package is approved. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. 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* Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* Mozilla Public License 2.0", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0 and/or Mozilla Public License 2.0", "Apache License 2.0". 15 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/autumnnash/packaging/reviews/2484925-python-ml- dtypes/licensecheck.txt [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [X]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/python3.15, /usr/lib64/python3.15/site-packages [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. [-]: 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. [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 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]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [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 Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [ ]: 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: [!]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-ml-dtypes-0.5.4-5.fc45.aarch64.rpm python-ml-dtypes-0.5.4-5.fc45.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/tmp4lti50lk')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python3-ml-dtypes.aarch64: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 9 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.9.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.15/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: 1 python3-ml-dtypes.aarch64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 4 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Unversioned so-files -------------------- python3-ml-dtypes: /usr/lib64/python3.15/site-packages/ml_dtypes/_ml_dtypes_ext.cpython-315-aarch64-linux-gnu.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/jax-ml/ml_dtypes/archive/v0.5.4/ml_dtypes-0.5.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : acaef497b420a15761cb525562b04d880b5c7afacea02d435a5d166fd8a99a16 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : acaef497b420a15761cb525562b04d880b5c7afacea02d435a5d166fd8a99a16 Requires -------- python3-ml-dtypes (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (python3.15dist(numpy) >= 1.21 with python3.15dist(numpy) >= 1.21.2 with python3.15dist(numpy) >= 1.23.3 with python3.15dist(numpy) >= 1.26 with python3.15dist(numpy) >= 2.1) ld-linux-aarch64.so.1()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.5.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- python3-ml-dtypes: python-ml-dtypes python3-ml-dtypes python3-ml-dtypes(aarch-64) python3.15-ml-dtypes python3.15dist(ml-dtypes) python3dist(ml-dtypes) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/autumnnash/packaging/reviews/2484925-python-ml-dtypes/srpm/python-ml-dtypes.spec 2026-06-22 14:13:14.844049448 -0700 +++ /home/autumnnash/packaging/reviews/2484925-python-ml-dtypes/srpm-unpacked/python-ml-dtypes.spec 2026-06-18 17:00:00.000000000 -0700 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.8.4) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 5; + 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 + %global _distro_extra_cxxflags -I/usr/include/eigen3 @@ -63,3 +73,18 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +## START: Generated by rpmautospec +* Fri Jun 19 2026 Diego Herrera <dherrera> - 0.5.4-5 +- Review changes + +* Wed Jun 17 2026 Diego Herrera <dherrera> - 0.5.4-4 +- General clean up + +* Tue Jun 09 2026 Diego Herrera <dherrera> - 0.5.4-3 +- Use pyp2spec instead of pyp2rpm + +* Tue Jun 09 2026 Diego Herrera <dherrera> - 0.5.4-2 +- First review round + +* Fri May 29 2026 Diego Herrera <dherrera> - 0.5.4-1 +- Initial package +## END: Generated by rpmautospec Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2484925 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: Haskell, Ocaml, Perl, fonts, R, PHP, C/C++, SugarActivity, Java Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-ml-dtypes Monitoring: Wasn't able to create project in Anitya. You can create it manually on: `https://release-monitoring.org`
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-f2deb2f37a