[Bug 2181028] New: Review Request: rust-userfaultfd - Rust bindings for the Linux userfaultfd functionality
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
Bug ID: 2181028 Summary: Review Request: rust-userfaultfd - Rust bindings for the Linux userfaultfd functionality Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fedora.dm0@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://github.com/dm0-/copr-firecracker/raw/fedora/rust-userfaultfd.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/dm0-/copr-firecracker/raw/fedora/rust-userfaultfd-0.5.1-1... Description: Rust bindings for the Linux userfaultfd functionality. Fedora Account System Username: dm0
This is a dependency of Firecracker. The spec is automatically generated, except to drop executable bits from documentation.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://crates.io/crates/us | |erfaultfd
--- Comment #1 from Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5696256 (failed)
Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.
- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field
--- 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=2181028
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-review? Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |decathorpe@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Depends On| |2181029 CC| |decathorpe@gmail.com Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181029 [Bug 2181029] Review Request: rust-userfaultfd-sys - Low-level bindings for userfaultfd functionality on Linux
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028 Bug 2181028 depends on bug 2181029, which changed state.
Bug 2181029 Summary: Review Request: rust-userfaultfd-sys - Low-level bindings for userfaultfd functionality on Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181029
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- Package looks good to me, with one exception:
Some tests fail on ppc64le: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=99195371
The previous version of this package skipped some tests on ppc64le: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-userfaultfd/blob/f36/f/rust-userfaul...
I've reported the problem upstream (it seems to be related to page size being "different" (i.e. "not 4KiB") on ppc64le Fedora kernels): https://github.com/bytecodealliance/userfaultfd-rs/issues/32
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
--- Comment #4 from fedora.dm0@gmail.com --- Sorry, I missed that by only building for Firecracker's supported platforms (x86_64 and aarch64). The spec and SRPM are updated.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- Perfect, thanks!
===
Package was generated with rust2rpm, simplifying the review.
- package builds and installs without errors on rawhide - test suite is run and all unit tests pass (skipped tests are justified) - latest version of the crate is packaged - license matches upstream specification (MIT OR Apache-2.0) and is acceptable for Fedora - license files are included with %license in %files - package complies with Rust Packaging Guidelines
Package APPROVED.
===
You can proceed with the unretirement request now.
The package needs to be unretired from the f37 and rawhide dist-git branches, and unblocked from the f37, f38, and f39 tags in koji.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-bc85a14eec has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-bc85a14eec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Last Closed| |2023-03-28 12:45:09
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-bc85a14eec 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=2181028
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13
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=2181028
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295 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-a4085b6295 *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295
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=2181028
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-a4085b6295 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-02106a6c13 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