https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
Bug ID: 2332970 Summary: Review Request: symengine - Fast symbolic manipulation library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: negativo17@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/symengine.spec SRPM URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/symengine-0.13.0-1.fc41.src.rpm Description: SymEngine is a standalone fast C++ symbolic manipulation library. Optional thin wrappers allow usage of the library from other languages. Fedora Account System Username: slaanesh
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://symengine.org/ Keywords| |AutomationTriaged
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8406730 (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=2332970
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |benson_muite@emailplus.org CC| |benson_muite@emailplus.org Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
Simone Caronni negativo17@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2333030
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2333030 [Bug 2333030] Review Request: <main package name here> - SymEngine Python Wrappers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #2 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [ ]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [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]: Package contains no static executables. [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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later", "Boost Software License 1.0", "BSD 3-Clause License", "Apache License 2.0", "Apache License (v2.0) or MIT license and/or MIT License", "BSD 3-Clause License and/or Boost Software License 1.0". 457 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/symengine/2332970-symengine/licensecheck.txt [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/cmake/symengine [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/cmake/symengine [ ]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [ ]: 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. [ ]: 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. [ ]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [ ]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 13002 bytes in 2 files. [ ]: 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 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]: 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 symengine-devel [ ]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: 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. [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: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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: symengine-0.13.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm symengine-devel-0.13.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm symengine-debuginfo-0.13.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm symengine-debugsource-0.13.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm symengine-0.13.0-1.fc42.src.rpm ============================================================ rpmlint session starts =========================================================== rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmpixjd9ib4')] checks: 32, packages: 5
symengine-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation ====================== 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 31 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 10.8 s =====================
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: symengine-debuginfo-0.13.0-1.fc42.x86_64.rpm ============================================================ rpmlint session starts =========================================================== rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmpdcz7b4gw')] checks: 32, packages: 1
======================= 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 4.7 s ======================
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/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: 4
symengine-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 28 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 10.2 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/symengine/symengine/archive/v0.13.0/symengine-0.13.0.tar.... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f46bcf037529cd1a422369327bf360ad4c7d2b02d0f607a62a5b09c74a55bb59 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f46bcf037529cd1a422369327bf360ad4c7d2b02d0f607a62a5b09c74a55bb59
Requires -------- symengine (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libflint.so.19()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_4.0.0)(64bit) libgmp.so.10()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libmpfr.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.11)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.13)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.15)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) libz.so.1(ZLIB_1.2.0)(64bit) libzstd.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH)
symengine-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cmake-filesystem cmake-filesystem(x86-64) libsymengine.so.0.13()(64bit)
symengine-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
symengine-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides -------- symengine: libsymengine.so.0.13()(64bit) symengine symengine(x86-64)
symengine-devel: cmake(SymEngine) cmake(symengine) symengine-devel symengine-devel(x86-64)
symengine-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) libsymengine.so.0.13.0-0.13.0-1.fc42.x86_64.debug()(64bit) symengine-debuginfo symengine-debuginfo(x86-64)
symengine-debugsource: symengine-debugsource symengine-debugsource(x86-64)
Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2332970 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: C/C++, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Haskell, Ocaml, PHP, Perl, fonts, SugarActivity, Python, Java, R Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Comments: a) Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=126988974 Does not build on i686 b) Add Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in symengine-devel c) Build log does not seem to contain any test output. d) Installed package has cereal headers which are BSD-3-Clause If these are needed, consider softlinking to the cereal package in Fedora: https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/cereal/ or if this is not possible, indicate it is bundled and add the appropriate license and add a license breakdown. e) Please ensure that /usr/lib64/cmake/symengine is owned
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #3 from Simone Caronni negativo17@gmail.com --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #2)
Comments: a) Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=126988974 Does not build on i686
Yeah, it does not. There are missing build requirements on i686. I've added ExcludeArch: %{ix86} and added the tracking bug.
b) Add Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in symengine-devel
This is already satisfied when building the RPM, adding it would be redundant:
$ rpm -qp --requires symengine-devel-0.13.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm | grep symengine libsymengine.so.0.13()(64bit)
c) Build log does not seem to contain any test output.
I think I forgot to upload the src.rpm along with the SPEC file last time, the output is there:
+ /usr/bin/ctest --test-dir redhat-linux-build --output-on-failure --force-new-ctest-process -j32 Internal ctest changing into directory: /builddir/build/BUILD/symengine-0.13.0-build/symengine-0.13.0/redhat-linux-build Test project /builddir/build/BUILD/symengine-0.13.0-build/symengine-0.13.0/redhat-linux-build Start 1: test_rcp [...] 65/65 Test #52: test_lambda_double ............... Passed 0.25 sec
100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 65
Total Test time (real) = 0.32 sec + RPM_EC=0
d) Installed package has cereal headers which are BSD-3-Clause If these are needed, consider softlinking to the cereal package in Fedora: https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/cereal/ or if this is not possible, indicate it is bundled and add the appropriate license and add a license breakdown.
Fixed, it can actually be built with -DWITH_SYSTEM_CEREAL=on.
e) Please ensure that /usr/lib64/cmake/symengine is owned
Fixed.
Spec URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/symengine.spec SRPM URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/symengine-0.13.0-1.fc41.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
Simone Caronni negativo17@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai | |lplus.org)
--- Comment #4 from Simone Caronni negativo17@gmail.com --- @benson_muite@emailplus.org sorry for the delay, was busy at work + christmas. Thanks!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #5 from Simone Caronni negativo17@gmail.com --- (In reply to Simone Caronni from comment #3)
Yeah, it does not. There are missing build requirements on i686. I've added ExcludeArch: %{ix86} and added the tracking bug.
Ah, no more tracking bug actually:
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=179258#c6 - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2063939 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2063939&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8406730 to 8450745
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8450745 (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=2332970
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai | |lplus.org) | Status|ASSIGNED |POST
--- Comment #8 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- The(In reply to Simone Caronni from comment #3)
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #2)
Comments: a) Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=126988974 Does not build on i686
Yeah, it does not. There are missing build requirements on i686. I've added ExcludeArch: %{ix86} and added the tracking bug.
Ok.
b) Add Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in symengine-devel
This is already satisfied when building the RPM, adding it would be redundant:
$ rpm -qp --requires symengine-devel-0.13.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm | grep symengine libsymengine.so.0.13()(64bit)
This is needed to ensure the license file is always included, in particular should there be any changes in the structure of the package. It should not add any maintenance burden.
c) Build log does not seem to contain any test output.
I think I forgot to upload the src.rpm along with the SPEC file last time, the output is there:
- /usr/bin/ctest --test-dir redhat-linux-build --output-on-failure
--force-new-ctest-process -j32 Internal ctest changing into directory: /builddir/build/BUILD/symengine-0.13.0-build/symengine-0.13.0/redhat-linux- build Test project /builddir/build/BUILD/symengine-0.13.0-build/symengine-0.13.0/redhat-linux- build Start 1: test_rcp [...] 65/65 Test #52: test_lambda_double ............... Passed 0.25 sec
100% tests passed, 0 tests failed out of 65
Total Test time (real) = 0.32 sec
- RPM_EC=0
Ok. They are there in the current build.
d) Installed package has cereal headers which are BSD-3-Clause If these are needed, consider softlinking to the cereal package in Fedora: https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/cereal/ or if this is not possible, indicate it is bundled and add the appropriate license and add a license breakdown.
Fixed, it can actually be built with -DWITH_SYSTEM_CEREAL=on.
Great.
e) Please ensure that /usr/lib64/cmake/symengine is owned
Fixed.
Thanks.
Spec URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/symengine.spec SRPM URL: https://slaanesh.fedorapeople.org/review/symengine-0.13.0-1.fc41.src.rpm
Approved. Please make change (b) before import.
If time and expertise allow review of one of: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2329630 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2329823 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325026
would be appreciated.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #9 from Simone Caronni negativo17@gmail.com --- (In reply to Benson Muite from comment #8)
$ rpm -qp --requires symengine-devel-0.13.0-1.fc41.x86_64.rpm | grep symengine libsymengine.so.0.13()(64bit)
This is needed to ensure the license file is always included, in particular should there be any changes in the structure of the package. It should not add any maintenance burden.
This is added anyway, as it requires the base package. These both pull in the same package:
libsymengine.so.0.13()(64bit) symengine(x86_64)
Anyway, I've added it, if bothers you.
If time and expertise allow review of one of: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2329630 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2329823 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2325026
would be appreciated.
Sure thing, give me a moment.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |RELEASE_PENDING
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/symengine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #11 from Simone Caronni negativo17@gmail.com --- Added xr-sig as admins.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RELEASE_PENDING |MODIFIED
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-bf83c09217 (cnmatrix-0.0^20220215git5936c62-1.fc40, sciplot0.2-0.2.2-1.fc40, and 1 more) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-bf83c09217
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-1d42e73a47 (cnmatrix-0.0^20220215git5936c62-1.fc41, sciplot0.2-0.2.2-1.fc41, and 1 more) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-1d42e73a47
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-1d42e73a47 has been pushed to the Fedora 41 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-1d42e73a47 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-1d42e73a47
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=2332970
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-bf83c09217 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-bf83c09217 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-bf83c09217
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=2332970
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2025-01-05 01:28:17
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-bf83c09217 (cnmatrix-0.0^20220215git5936c62-2.fc40, sciplot0.2-0.2.2-1.fc40, and 1 more) has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332970
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-1d42e73a47 (cnmatrix-0.0^20220215git5936c62-2.fc41, sciplot0.2-0.2.2-1.fc41, and 1 more) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com