[Bug 2264283] New: Review Request: cros-guest-tools - Chromium OS integration meta package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Bug ID: 2264283 Summary: Review Request: cros-guest-tools - Chromium OS integration meta package Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: sergio@serjux.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/cros-guest-tools/cros-guest-tools.spec SRPM URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/cros-guest-tools/cros-guest-tools-121-1.fc...
Description: This package has dependencies on all other packages necessary for Chromium OS integration.
Fedora Account System Username: sergiomb
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #1 from Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=113511158
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR), | |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) CC| |leo@craftcat.dev
--- Comment #2 from Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com --- *** Bug 2030862 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR), | |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://chromium.googlesour | |ce.com/chromiumos/container | |s/cros-container-guest-tool | |s
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7018177 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(sergio@serjux.com | |) Whiteboard| |NotReady
--- Comment #4 from Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev --- Hi Sergio. This package currently installs files in /etc/skel/.config/pulse but the directory itself and many others are not owned by the package.
``` [X]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /etc/skel/.config/pulse [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/ansible, /etc/skel/.config/pulse, /var/lib/polkit-1/localauthority, /usr/share/ansible/plugins/callback, /etc/skel/.config, /var/lib/polkit-1, /etc/gtk-2.0, /var/lib/polkit-1/localauthority/10-vendor.d, /usr/share/ansible/plugins ```
Can the use of /etc/skel/.config be changed to something more visible, like /etc/skell/cros/.config? The package could also then own these directories.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #5 from Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev --- Additionally, - Note: warning: File listed twice: /etc/gtk-3.0/settings.ini
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review? Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |leo@craftcat.dev Whiteboard|NotReady |
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(sergio@serjux.com | |) |
--- Comment #6 from Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com --- rpm -qf /usr/share/ansible/ ansible-core-2.16.10-1.fc39.noarch
rpm -qf /var/lib/polkit-1/localauthority/ polkit-pkla-compat-0.1-26.fc39.x86_64
so the vast of directory are already owned .
about change directory , I think is general the use of /etc/skel/.config , also instructions and is meant to copy to $HOME/.config
I fixed the File listed twice
Let me know what I could do
thanks,
Spec URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/cros-guest-tools/cros-guest-tools.spec SRPM URL: https://sergiomb.fedorapeople.org/cros-guest-tools/cros-guest-tools-126-1.fc...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2047475 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2047475&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 7018177 to 8032570
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8032570 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Found issues:
- Not a valid SPDX expression 'BSD'. 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 - A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cros-guest-tools Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicti... - Systemd service file(s) in cros-host-fonts Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scrip... - Systemd user unit service file(s) in cros-garcon, cros-notificationd, cros-sommelier, cros-sommelier-config Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_...
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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #9 from Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com --- License fixed to BSD-3-Clause
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #10 from Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com --- [fedora-review-service-build]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2047535 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2047535&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8032570 to 8033816
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8033816 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Found issues:
- A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/cros-guest-tools Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicti... - Systemd service file(s) in cros-host-fonts Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scrip... - Systemd user unit service file(s) in cros-garcon, cros-notificationd, cros-sommelier, cros-sommelier-config Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_...
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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #13 from Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev --- Overall LGTM. APPROVED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #14 from Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev --- Please go to https://pagure.io/packager-sponsors/issues to get a sponsor. I am unfortunately unable to sponsor you, but I'm sure you'll be able to find somebody willing. Thanks for your contribution!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #15 from Sergio Basto sergio@serjux.com --- (In reply to Leo Puvilland from comment #14)
Please go to https://pagure.io/packager-sponsors/issues to get a sponsor. I am unfortunately unable to sponsor you, but I'm sure you'll be able to find somebody willing. Thanks for your contribution!
thank you , I'm a proven packager the packages are already build on koji expect fo F41 , because [1]
this is unretire process [2] that is why (I guess) I didn't provide my fas (sergiomb)
Best regards,
[1] https://pagure.io/releng/issue/12343#comment-933570
[2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Retirement_...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-0e6d75e940 (cros-guest-tools-126-2.fc40) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-0e6d75e940
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-d8998d154b (cros-guest-tools-126-2.fc39) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-d8998d154b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-13cac0d3e8 (cros-guest-tools-126-2.el8) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-13cac0d3e8
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #19 from Leo Puvilland leo@craftcat.dev --- Apologies, did not see that. I must have confused this bug with another that had FE-NEEDSPONSOR as blocking. Thank you!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-26103c16c7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-26103c16c7
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-26b2c36511 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-26b2c36511` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-26b2c36511
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-58e1fba480 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-58e1fba480` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-58e1fba480
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2024-09-30 00:36:03
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-26103c16c7 (cros-guest-tools-126-3.el8) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-58e1fba480 (cros-guest-tools-126-3.fc39) has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2264283
--- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-26b2c36511 (cros-guest-tools-126-3.fc40) has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com