https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262694
--- Comment #76 from Jonathan Steffan <[email protected]> --- This is looking good. One more round of fixes and I think we are there. [!]: 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. Unversioned so-files -------------------- python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXCore.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXFormat.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXGenGlsl.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXGenMdl.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXGenMsl.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXGenOsl.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXGenShader.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXRender.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXRenderGlsl.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so python3-materialx: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/materialx/PyMaterialXRenderOsl.cpython-314-x86_64-linux-gnu.so This is fine. [!]: 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", "BSD 3-Clause License", "*No copyright* Apache License", "Apache License 2.0", "MIT License", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0 and/or ISC License and/or MIT License", "*No copyright* ISC License", "*No copyright* ISC License and/or MIT License", "Apache License 2.0 and/or BSD 3-Clause License", "zlib License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "MIT License and/or The Unlicense", "Apache License 2.0 and/or Khronos License and/or MIT License", "Khronos License", "*No copyright* Boost Software License 1.0", "Boost Software License 1.0", "Simple Public License and/or zlib License". 729 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/jon/Reviews/materialx/licensecheck.txt Missing: ISC Khronos License zlib [!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/share/licenses/materialx [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/licenses/materialx, /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages, /usr/lib/python3.14 [!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. There are missing license files. Only the Apache-2.0 is included. Maybe include THIRD-PARTY.md too, but this wont cover the license file requirements. /usr/share/licenses/materialx is still unowned. [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.14/site- packages/materialx(python3-mkdocs-material-extensions), /usr/lib/python3.14/site- packages/materialx/__pycache__(python3-mkdocs-material-extensions) This might be fine yeah? [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. Noting: bundled(nanogui) = 0.2.0^20221102gitf5020e2 [!]: Development files must be in a -devel package materialx-data.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/materialx/stdlib/genosl/include/color4.h materialx-data.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/materialx/stdlib/genosl/include/matrix33.h materialx-data.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/materialx/stdlib/genosl/include/mx_funcs.h materialx-data.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/materialx/stdlib/genosl/include/vector2.h materialx-data.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/materialx/stdlib/genosl/include/vector4.h Do you know why these are in the -data package? If it's for good reason, I'm good with it. [!]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. DEBUG util.py:459: No match for argument: pkgconfig(OpenImageIO) DEBUG util.py:459: No match for argument: pkgconfig(oslcomp) Looks like we need to disable 32bit support. Everything else built fine. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=138810877 %files list fixes: materialx.spec:229: W: shared-dir-glob-in-files %{_bindir}/* Don't use %{_bindir}/* and since there is not a command prefix, you need to list out each file. Cleanup: materialx.spec:165: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 2, tab: line 165) materialx-data.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/materialx/resources/Materials/TestSuite/libraries/metal/textures/mesh_wire_norm.png /usr/share/materialx/resources/Images/mesh_wire_norm.png -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262694 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202262694%23c76 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
