[Bug 2154636] New: Review Request: wf-recorder - Screen recorder for wlroots-based compositors eg swaywm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
Bug ID: 2154636 Summary: Review Request: wf-recorder - Screen recorder for wlroots-based compositors eg swaywm Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: bob.hepple@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wf-recorder/fedora-37... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wf-recorder/fedora-37... Description:
wf-recorder is a utility program for screen recording of wlroots-based compositors (more specifically, those that support wlr-screencopy-v1 and xdg-output). Its dependencies are ffmpeg, wayland-client and wayland-protocols.
Fedora Account System Username: wef
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #1 from Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com --- In this build, the default codec has been changed to libvpx-v9 as that is available in ffmpeg and ffmpeg-free.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ngompa13@gmail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |ngompa13@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Taking this review.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #3 from Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com --- Thanks Neal. As you can see, I've taken the path of least resistance (vp9) as I wasn't keen on fiddling with vp8 and file extensions. I have added a message on ^C / SIGINT to please wait for termination.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #4 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com ---
- change default codec to libopenh264
This is wrong in the changelog now?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #5 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- You might want to try to see if https://github.com/ammen99/wf-recorder/pull/198 helps with this.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #6 from Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com --- Awesome! Thanks Neal!
This one is built from https://github.com/ammen99/wf-recorder/pull/198 - works fine on f37 with ffmpeg and ffmpeg-free.
With ffmpeg, '-c libx264' still works but you need to use '-f recording.mp4' to get the exact behaviour as in the rpmfusion version (0.3.0-4).
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wf-recorder/fedora-37... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wf-recorder/fedora-37...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #7 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com ---
Its dependencies are ffmpeg, wayland-client and wayland-protocols.
This statement in the description is redundant with what the package expresses as dependencies automatically. It should be dropped.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #8 from Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com --- Fair 'nuf:
SPEC URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wf-recorder/fedora-37... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/wef/wf-recorder/fedora-37...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #9 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
===== 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]: 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. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "MIT License", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* MIT License". 13 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ngompa/2154636-wf-recorder/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: 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. [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. [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. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files. [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: No rpmlint messages. [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 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). [x]: 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. [x]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [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: No rpmlint messages. [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: wf-recorder-0.3.1-0.1.20221222git3933ab2.fc38.x86_64.rpm wf-recorder-debuginfo-0.3.1-0.1.20221222git3933ab2.fc38.x86_64.rpm wf-recorder-debugsource-0.3.1-0.1.20221222git3933ab2.fc38.x86_64.rpm wf-recorder-0.3.1-0.1.20221222git3933ab2.fc38.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/tmpbgw7u99m')] checks: 31, packages: 4
============================================================================ 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s ============================================================================
Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: wf-recorder-debuginfo-0.3.1-0.1.20221222git3933ab2.fc38.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/tmppvvwgx5u')] checks: 31, packages: 1
============================================================================ 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 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: 3
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/ammen99/wf-recorder/archive/3933ab2260291926daaf2da9d0a7a... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0ce5a5a50f06afc3fd73c16c83bdf84126ec34945c84439f963b58d75a33d9a6 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0ce5a5a50f06afc3fd73c16c83bdf84126ec34945c84439f963b58d75a33d9a6
Requires -------- wf-recorder (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libavcodec.so.59()(64bit) libavcodec.so.59(LIBAVCODEC_59)(64bit) libavdevice.so.59()(64bit) libavdevice.so.59(LIBAVDEVICE_59)(64bit) libavfilter.so.8()(64bit) libavfilter.so.8(LIBAVFILTER_8)(64bit) libavformat.so.59()(64bit) libavformat.so.59(LIBAVFORMAT_59)(64bit) libavutil.so.57()(64bit) libavutil.so.57(LIBAVUTIL_57)(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) libpulse-simple.so.0()(64bit) libpulse-simple.so.0(PULSE_0)(64bit) libpulse.so.0()(64bit) libpulse.so.0(PULSE_0)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libswresample.so.4()(64bit) libswresample.so.4(LIBSWRESAMPLE_4)(64bit) libwayland-client.so.0()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH)
wf-recorder-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
wf-recorder-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides -------- wf-recorder: wf-recorder wf-recorder(x86-64)
wf-recorder-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) wf-recorder-debuginfo wf-recorder-debuginfo(x86-64)
wf-recorder-debugsource: wf-recorder-debugsource wf-recorder-debugsource(x86-64)
Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2154636 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, C/C++ Disabled plugins: PHP, Java, Haskell, Ocaml, SugarActivity, Perl, Python, R, fonts Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ Status|NEW |POST
--- Comment #10 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Everything looks good.
PACKAGE APPROVED.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #11 from Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com --- Thanks Neal!
$ fedpkg request-repo wf-recorder 2154636 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/50015 $ fedpkg request-branch --repo wf-recorder f37 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/50016
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/wf-recorder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #13 from Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com --- I'm a bit stuck on the 'fedpkg push'. Raised an issue at https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/11062.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #14 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- My pull requests were merged, so you should rebase your package on current git master: 64b23385ae9f7b858b5bcf60d4001e3873b5f4ca (commit dated today)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #15 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #14)
My pull requests were merged, so you should rebase your package on current git master: 64b23385ae9f7b858b5bcf60d4001e3873b5f4ca (commit dated today)
Whoops, pull a9725f75dd3469e1434c99e32607ad2b7ef62ace instead.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #16 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #15)
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #14)
My pull requests were merged, so you should rebase your package on current git master: 64b23385ae9f7b858b5bcf60d4001e3873b5f4ca (commit dated today)
Whoops, pull a9725f75dd3469e1434c99e32607ad2b7ef62ace instead.
Upstream is now using VP8+Vorbis on WebM as of a40f9ad9f09fa142092c67e19f8679246b7ad8af. This makes it more compatible with social media services.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-f28d8e2999 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-f28d8e2999
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Last Closed| |2023-01-04 22:46:50
--- Comment #18 from Bob Hepple bob.hepple@gmail.com --- Now that pdc has been given a kick, I was able to press on. I've built a40f9ad9f09fa142092c67e19f8679246b7ad8af for f37 and rawhide.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2154636
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-f28d8e2999 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-f28d8e2999 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-f28d8e2999
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=2154636
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|CURRENTRELEASE |ERRATA
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-f28d8e2999 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com