[Bug 2172444] New: Review Request: libdex - a library supporting "Deferred Execution" for GNOME and GTK
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
Bug ID: 2172444 Summary: Review Request: libdex - a library supporting "Deferred Execution" for GNOME and GTK Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: amigadave@amigadave.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://amigadave.fedorapeople.org/libdex.spec SRPM URL: https://amigadave.fedorapeople.org/libdex-0.1.0-1.fc39.src.rpm Description: Dex is a library supporting "Deferred Execution" with the explicit goal of integrating with GNOME and GTK-based applications. It provides primatives for supporting futures in a variety of ways with both read-only and writable views. Additionally, integration with existing asynchronous-based APIs is provided through the use of wrapper promises. "Fibers" are implemented which allows for writing synchronous looking code which calls asynchronous APIs from GIO underneath. Fedora Account System Username: amigadave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://gitlab.gnome.org/ch | |ergert/libdex
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5556891 (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=2172444
David King amigadave@amigadave.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #2 from David King amigadave@amigadave.com --- Spec URL: https://amigadave.fedorapeople.org/libdex.spec SRPM URL: https://amigadave.fedorapeople.org/libdex-0.1.0-1.fc39.src.rpm
Moved .pc file to -devel subpackage.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com --- Created attachment 1945712 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1945712&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 5556891 to 5556915
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5556915 (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=2172444
Michael Catanzaro mcatanza@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mcatanza@redhat.com CC| |mcatanza@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
--- Comment #5 from David King amigadave@amigadave.com --- Spec URL: https://amigadave.fedorapeople.org/libdex.spec SRPM URL: https://amigadave.fedorapeople.org/libdex-0.1.0-1.fc39.src.rpm
Added -devel-docs subpackage for developer documentation.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
Michael Catanzaro mcatanza@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Michael Catanzaro mcatanza@redhat.com --- Here is review from before you added the -devel-docs subpackage. There are a few fail points but I believe they are all invalid and I suggest ignoring them. The only real fails are related to the lack of -devel-docs, which you just added. Accordingly, this package passes review.
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
Issues: ======= - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 1402880 bytes in 198 files. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_documentation
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
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", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later", "BSD 3-Clause License", "MIT License GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later". 20 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/mcatanzaro/2172444-libdex/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Pretty sure you can ignore this failure because the criterion seems incorrect. These dirs are supposed to have shared ownership. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0(gnome-autoar, malcontent-ui-libs, GConf2, libgxps, libarrow-glib-libs, gfbgraph, template-glib, gnome- bluetooth3.34-libs, gitg-libs, ghex-libs, libinsane-gobject, gupnp-av, libgexiv2, libmash, goocanvas2, at-spi2-core, javascriptcoregtk4.0, gupnp-dlna, gtksourceview5, libshumate, gnome-calculator, gsequencer, javascriptcoregtk6.0, gcr-libs, gcr3, graphene, gupnp-igd, libgepub, clutter, libcryptui, libdmapsharing4, libpanel, libarrow-flight-libs, javascriptcoregtk4.1, libgnomekbd, libarrow-dataset-glib-libs, ibus- libs, gupnp, playerctl-libs, webkitgtk6.0, gplugin-gtk4-libs, libmanette, fcitx-libs, accountsservice-libs, libdazzle, vte291, libgee06, vips, libmodulemd, libmypaint, libsecret, librsvg2, gnome- bluetooth-libs, jsonrpc-glib, atk, libsoup, libmodulemd1, libxmlb, gnome-menus, libgdata, libjcat, grilo, gdk-pixbuf2, parquet-glib-libs, libtracker-sparql, glade-libs, webkit2gtk4.0, gst-devtools, zbar-gtk, babl, gmime30, libgtop2, gucharmap-libs, harfbuzz, rygel, libgdl, gnome-online-accounts, libpeas, gtk3, gtk2, vte, gtk4, libsoup3, gsound, appstream, webkit2gtk4.1, malcontent-libs, libxklavier, gspell, libgee, geoclue2-libs, gplugin-libs, libchamplain, gstreamer1-rtsp-server, libhandy, libgnome-keyring, gtksourceview4, gobject-introspection, json-glib, gssdp, amtk), /usr/share/gir-1.0(webkit2gtk4.0-devel, glade-devel, libmodulemd- devel, gucharmap-devel, libmanette-devel, libchamplain-devel, rygel- devel, gnome-online-accounts-devel, vte-devel, gnome- bluetooth3.34-libs-devel, graphene-devel, javascriptcoregtk4.1-devel, gupnp-igd-devel, vte291-devel, fcitx5-gtk-devel, GConf2-devel, json- glib-devel, jsonrpc-glib-devel, gsequencer-devel, libmash-devel, gmime30-devel, libpanel-devel, gcr3-devel, gst-devtools-devel, libsoup-devel, tracker-devel, parquet-glib-devel, gobject- introspection-devel, gcr-devel, libdazzle-devel, babl-devel, libhandy- devel, libinsane-gobject-devel, libgee-devel, colord-gtk-devel, amtk- devel, libgxps-devel, gegl04-devel, webkit2gtk4.1-devel, libgepub- devel, libgtop2-devel, libgdata-devel, gtk2-devel, webkitgtk6.0-devel, libmodulemd1-devel, grilo-devel, libgee06-devel, gspell-devel, gupnp- dlna-devel, javascriptcoregtk6.0-devel, bamf-devel, gtk3-devel, geoclue2-devel, gplugin-gtk4-devel, at-spi2-core-devel, libarrow- dataset-glib-devel, libdmapsharing4-devel, fcitx-devel, budgie- desktop-devel, goocanvas2-devel, appstream-devel, clutter-devel, libarrow-glib-devel, gtksourceview4-devel, zbar-gtk-devel, ibus-devel, gplugin-devel, gssdp-devel, gstreamer1-rtsp-server-devel, harfbuzz- devel, gnome-autoar-devel, gtksourceview5-devel, libcryptui-devel, totem-pl-parser-devel, libxmlb-devel, gfbgraph-devel, atk-devel, libsecret-devel, gnome-menus-devel, javascriptcoregtk4.0-devel, gtk4-devel, gdm-devel, libjcat-devel, libgexiv2-devel, libgnome- keyring-devel, malcontent-devel, libsoup3-devel, libgnomekbd-devel, template-glib-devel, gupnp-av-devel, vips-devel, gdk-pixbuf2-devel, libshumate-devel, gnome-calculator-devel, libxklavier-devel, ghex- devel, libadwaita-devel, malcontent-ui-devel, gitg-devel, clapper- devel, gsound-devel, libgdl-devel, libmypaint-devel, librsvg2-devel, accountsservice-devel, gnome-bluetooth-libs-devel, libpeas-devel, gupnp-devel), /usr/share/vala(libsoup3-devel, libhandy-devel, libgda5-ui-devel, gplugin-vala, libcanberra-devel, folks-devel, babl- devel, caribou-devel, ibus-devel, libgee-devel, libmanette-devel, gegl04-devel, template-glib-devel, libgweather4-devel, rygel-devel, gssdp-devel, libgdata-devel, gnome-online-accounts-devel, gupnp-av- devel, gmime-devel, gnome-autoar-devel, libgnome-keyring-devel, gtksourceview5-devel, libosinfo-devel, vte291-devel, grilo-devel, gnome-calculator-devel, libshumate-devel, libgee06-devel, gedit-devel, gspell-devel, jsonrpc-glib-devel, libdmapsharing-devel, libgit2-glib- devel, gupnp-dlna-devel, libsecret-devel, appstream-devel, vala, pulseaudio-libs-devel, rhythmbox-devel, gitg-devel, bamf-devel, gmime30-devel, libgweather-devel, gsound-devel, libgnome-games- support-devel, libpanel-devel, libgda-devel, geoclue2-devel, gcr3-devel, accountsservice-devel, libdmapsharing4-devel, librsvg2-devel, libgda-ui-devel, dconf-devel, libjcat-devel, budgie- desktop-devel, libgexiv2-devel, libgda5-devel, libsoup-devel, gtksourceview3-devel, tracker-devel, gupnp-devel, libtranslit-devel, gcr-devel, zeitgeist-devel, libdazzle-devel, gtksourceview4-devel), /usr/share/vala/vapi(libsoup3-devel, libhandy-devel, libgda5-ui-devel, gplugin-vala, libcanberra-devel, folks-devel, babl-devel, caribou- devel, ibus-devel, libgee-devel, libmanette-devel, gegl04-devel, template-glib-devel, libgweather4-devel, rygel-devel, gssdp-devel, libgdata-devel, gnome-online-accounts-devel, gupnp-av-devel, gmime- devel, gnome-autoar-devel, libgnome-keyring-devel, gtksourceview5-devel, libosinfo-devel, vte291-devel, grilo-devel, gnome-calculator-devel, libshumate-devel, libgee06-devel, gedit-devel, gspell-devel, jsonrpc-glib-devel, libdmapsharing-devel, libgit2-glib- devel, gupnp-dlna-devel, libsecret-devel, appstream-devel, vala, pulseaudio-libs-devel, rhythmbox-devel, fwupd-devel, libzeitgeist- devel, gitg-devel, bamf-devel, gmime30-devel, libgweather-devel, gsound-devel, libgnome-games-support-devel, libpanel-devel, libgda- devel, geoclue2-devel, gcr3-devel, accountsservice-devel, libdmapsharing4-devel, librsvg2-devel, libgda-ui-devel, dconf-devel, libjcat-devel, budgie-desktop-devel, libgexiv2-devel, libgda5-devel, libsoup-devel, gtksourceview3-devel, tracker-devel, gupnp-devel, libtranslit-devel, gcr-devel, zeitgeist-devel, libdazzle-devel, gtksourceview4-devel) [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [-]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [-]: 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. [-]: 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== 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. [x]: 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. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. Note: I don't think %check is actually a good idea, so this is fine. [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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [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) Note: This fail is due to use of rpm-autospec, which is good, so ignore. [!]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Note: Arch-ed rpms have a total of 1607680 bytes in /usr/share Note: This is the documentation. [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: libdex-0.1.0-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm libdex-devel-0.1.0-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm libdex-debuginfo-0.1.0-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm libdex-debugsource-0.1.0-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm libdex-0.1.0-1.fc39.src.rpm =============================================== rpmlint session starts =============================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.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/tmpo56h7nni')] checks: 31, packages: 5
libdex.src: W: strange-permission libdex.spec 600 ================ 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.7 s ================
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: libdex-debuginfo-0.1.0-1.fc39.x86_64.rpm =============================================== rpmlint session starts =============================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.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/tmpryr1upt8')] checks: 31, packages: 1
================ 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s ================
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.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: 31, packages: 4
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.7 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://gitlab.gnome.org/chergert/libdex/uploads/8894d387768d3b8375b5d112198... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2d2275e19a834d51eb0903e0d61d6317a458f5eaaca070b796d6eacdb842628e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2d2275e19a834d51eb0903e0d61d6317a458f5eaaca070b796d6eacdb842628e
Requires -------- libdex (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libatomic.so.1()(64bit) libatomic.so.1(LIBATOMIC_1.0)(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) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) liburing.so.2()(64bit) liburing.so.2(LIBURING_2.0)(64bit) liburing.so.2(LIBURING_2.2)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH)
libdex-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/pkg-config libdex(x86-64) libdex-1.so.1()(64bit) pkgconfig(gio-2.0)
libdex-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
libdex-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides -------- libdex: libdex libdex(x86-64) libdex-1.so.1()(64bit)
libdex-devel: libdex-devel libdex-devel(x86-64) pkgconfig(libdex-1)
libdex-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) libdex-1.so.1.0.0-0.1.0-1.fc39.x86_64.debug()(64bit) libdex-debuginfo libdex-debuginfo(x86-64)
libdex-debugsource: libdex-debugsource libdex-debugsource(x86-64)
Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/mcatanzaro/2172444-libdex/srpm/libdex.spec 2023-02-23 11:07:38.654458383 -0600 +++ /home/mcatanzaro/2172444-libdex/srpm-unpacked/libdex.spec 2023-02-22 06:01:12.000000000 -0600 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.3.5) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 1; + 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 + Name: libdex Version: 0.1.0 @@ -69,3 +79,4 @@
%changelog -%autochangelog +* Wed Feb 22 2023 John Doe packager@example.com - 0.1.0-1 +- Uncommitted changes
Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2172444 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Python, PHP, Ocaml, fonts, SugarActivity, Haskell, Perl, Java, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
--- Comment #7 from Michael Catanzaro mcatanza@redhat.com --- (In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #6)
libdex.src: W: strange-permission libdex.spec 600
Oh I almost forgot to flag this. Since the file was downloaded by fedora-review and HTTP requests don't come with Unix permissions, I guess this must be a fedora-review bug. Not sure what's going on there. Worth double checking the spec file permissions when committing to git just in case.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/libdex
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
David King amigadave@amigadave.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST
--- Comment #9 from David King amigadave@amigadave.com --- (In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #7)
(In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #6)
libdex.src: W: strange-permission libdex.spec 600
Oh I almost forgot to flag this. Since the file was downloaded by fedora-review and HTTP requests don't come with Unix permissions, I guess this must be a fedora-review bug. Not sure what's going on there. Worth double checking the spec file permissions when committing to git just in case.
That indeed turned out to be bogus; the local permissions were 644.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-8053a38d42 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-8053a38d42
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2172444
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-8053a38d42 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-8053a38d42
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=2172444
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2023-03-11 03:08:01
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-8053a38d42 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com