[Bug 1761614] New: Review Request: intel-mediasdk - Hardware-accelerated video processing on Intel integrated GPUs library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Bug ID: 1761614 Summary: Review Request: intel-mediasdk - Hardware-accelerated video processing on Intel integrated GPUs library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dominik@greysector.net QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk.spec SRPM URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-19.3.0... Description: Intel Media SDK provides a plain C API to access hardware-accelerated video decode, encode and filtering on Intel Gen graphics hardware platforms. Implementation written in C++ 11 with parts in C-for-Media (CM).
Supported video encoders: HEVC, AVC, MPEG-2, JPEG, VP9 Supported video decoders: HEVC, AVC, VP8, VP9, MPEG-2, VC1, JPEG Supported video pre-processing filters: Color Conversion, Deinterlace, Denoise, Resize, Rotate, Composition
Fedora Account System Username: rathann
Note: This will replace libmfx (which I maintain). libmfx was created as a fork of intel-mediasdk, but the fork author recommends going back to intel-mediasdk for Linux at this time: https://github.com/lu-zero/mfx_dispatch/issues/59#issuecomment-466965897 .
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mike@cchtml.com Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com --- Taking for review.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
--- Comment #2 from Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com --- If it is the case that libmfx recommends the mediasdk, should we add an Obsoletes on libmfx?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski dominik@greysector.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
--- Comment #3 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski dominik@greysector.net --- You mean mediasdk replaces libmfx and yes, Obsoletes: are in order here.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski dominik@greysector.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
--- Comment #4 from Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com --- Fixes required: - Add Obsoletes: libmfx < %{mfx_version} - License text must be packaged in a %license macro - The -devel subpackage must have Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} - Add the package version and release number to the end of the first line of your %changelog entry
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [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. [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.
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. [!]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/mfx, /usr/share/mfx [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/mfx, /usr/share/mfx [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/include/mfx(libmfx- 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 [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. [!]: 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. [!]: 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]: 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
===== 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in intel- mediasdk-devel [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. [x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [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]: 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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm intel-mediasdk-devel-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm intel-mediasdk-debuginfo-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm intel-mediasdk-debugsource-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-1.fc32.src.rpm intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-documentation intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-libs/libintel-mediasdk intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog intel-mediasdk-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog intel-mediasdk.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee intel-mediasdk.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings.
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: intel-mediasdk-debuginfo-19.3.0-1.fc32.x86_64.rpm intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "en_US.utf8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "en_US.utf8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). intel-mediasdk-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog intel-mediasdk-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://mediasdk.intel.com <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://mediasdk.intel.com <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> intel-mediasdk.x86_64: W: no-documentation intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog intel-mediasdk-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://mediasdk.intel.com <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-libs/libintel-mediasdk intel-mediasdk-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
--- Comment #5 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski dominik@greysector.net --- Thanks for the review.
Spec URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk.spec SRPM URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/intel-mediasdk/intel-mediasdk-19.3.0...
* Sat Nov 09 2019 Dominik Mierzejewski rpm@greysector.net 19.3.0-2 - Add missing Obsoletes: and Requires: - Add license text and docs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Michael Cronenworth mike@cchtml.com --- Looks good. Let's get it in Fedora.
APPROVED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
--- Comment #7 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/intel-mediasdk
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2019-1749ddf50e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-1749ddf50e
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-1749ddf50e
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1761614
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2019-12-05 01:40:50
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- intel-mediasdk-19.3.0-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com