[Bug 2073765] New: Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

Bug ID: 2073765
           Summary: Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect
                    architectures runnable by your machine+kernel
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
          Hardware: All
                OS: Linux
            Status: NEW
         Component: Package Review
          Severity: medium
          Priority: medium
          Assignee: [e-mail]
          Reporter: [e-mail]
        QA Contact: [e-mail]
                CC: [e-mail]
  Target Milestone: ---
    Classification: Fedora

Spec URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test.spec
SRPM URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test-0.18-1.fc34.src.rpm
Description: This tool will tell you "can your machine+kernel run architecture
X?".

The check is for the ability to run machine code and supporting appropriate
syscall ABI, not for the presence of userland libraries.  IE, a positive
answer means you can use a chroot or container of that architecture, add it
to your multiarch set, etc, but doesn't mean you can currently run non-static
binaries without installing required libraries.

Fedora Account System Username: cheeselee

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

Jakub Kadlčík  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[e-mail]
           Doc Type|---                         |If docs needed, set a value

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Kadlčík  ---
Hello Robin,
thank you for the package.

I am trying to use it, and I am getting results, that I wouldn't
expect. For example:

[jkadlcik@zeratul ~]$ arch-test arm64
    arm64: ok
    [jkadlcik@zeratul ~]$ arch-test s390x
    s390x: ok
    [jkadlcik@zeratul ~]$ arch-test ppc64el
    ppc64el: ok

I am running on a standard Lenovo X1 laptop, which is x86_64.

[jkadlcik@zeratul ~]$ uname -a
    Linux zeratul 5.18.17-200.fc36.x86_64 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Thu Aug 11
14:36:06 UTC 2022 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

So I would expect only something like amd64 and i386 to be OK.
Is this a bug or am I misunderstanding the package?
Sorry if I am missing something obvious.

Thank you,
Jakub

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #2 from Robin Lee  ---
(In reply to Jakub Kadlčík from comment #1)
> So I would expect only something like amd64 and i386 to be OK.
> Is this a bug or am I misunderstanding the package?
> Sorry if I am missing something obvious.

This tool will take user-space emulators, e.g. qemu-user into account.
For example, it will return ok for riscv if qemu-user-static-riscv is
installed, no matter what is the native arch.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #3 from Jakub Kadlčík  ---
> This tool will take user-space emulators, e.g. qemu-user into
> account. For example, it will return ok for riscv if
> qemu-user-static-riscv is installed, no matter what is the native
> arch.

Thank you for the explanation
> BuildRequires:  binutils-riscv64-linux-gnu
> BuildRequires:  binutils-aarch64-linux-gnu
> BuildRequires:  binutils-alpha-linux-gnu
> BuildRequires:  binutils-arc-linux-gnu
> ...

Are these really needed? I removed all the binutils-* BuildRequires
and the package still successfully builds in Copr for all Fedora
chroots and architectures.
> %{_bindir}/*
> %{_prefix}/lib/*
> %{_mandir}/man1/*

Please be more specific here, for example

%{_bindir}/%{name}
    %{_bindir}/elf-arch
    ...
> arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/lib/arch-test/alpha
> arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/lib/arch-test/amd64
> arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/lib/arch-test/arm64

Fedora-review tool returns these in the Rpmlint section but if I
understand correctly, this is done intentionally.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

Jakub Kadlčík  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |fedora-review?
           Assignee|[e-mail]    |[e-mail]

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #4 from Robin Lee  ---
Spec URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test.spec
SRPM URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test-0.18-1.fc36.src.rpm

Changes:
1. use %generate_buildrequires to generate the list of binutils BR
2. Don't run configure to not opt out any arch
3. Include the mingw arches and apply an upstream patch to fix the build
4. Convert to rpmautospec

(In reply to Jakub Kadlčík from comment #3)
> > BuildRequires:  binutils-riscv64-linux-gnu
> > BuildRequires:  binutils-aarch64-linux-gnu
> > BuildRequires:  binutils-alpha-linux-gnu
> > BuildRequires:  binutils-arc-linux-gnu
> > ...
>
> Are these really needed? I removed all the binutils-* BuildRequires
> and the package still successfully builds in Copr for all Fedora
> chroots and architectures.

I use %generate_buildrequires to generate the list of binutils variants
> > %{_bindir}/*
> > %{_prefix}/lib/*
> > %{_mandir}/man1/*
>
> Please be more specific here, for example
> %{_bindir}/%{name}
> %{_bindir}/elf-arch
> ...

done
> > arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/lib/arch-test/alpha
> > arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/lib/arch-test/amd64
> > arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/lib/arch-test/arm64
>
> Fedora-review tool returns these in the Rpmlint section but if I
> understand correctly, this is done intentionally.

Yes. That's the trick of this package. It simple build different kinds of
executables and run each to see
whether the current environment can run codes of that arch.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #5 from Robin Lee  ---
Spec URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test.spec
SRPM URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test-0.18-1.fc38.src.rpm

Using %generate_buildrequires is too tricky for this package, I changed to
specify BR by
command paths.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #6 from Robin Lee  ---
FYI, this tool is mainly to be used with BuildStream, the tool that builds
Flatpak runtimes and GNOME OS.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #7 from Jakub Kadlčík  ---
Thank you for the changes, Robin.
> Version:        0.18

There is already 0.19
https://github.com/kilobyte/arch-test/releases/tag/v0.19

Which includes the Patch0 change, I think.

Otherwise LGTM

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

Petr Pisar  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #8 from Robin Lee  ---
Spec URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test.spec
SRPM URL: https://cheeselee.fedorapeople.org/arch-test-0.19-1.fc36.src.rpm

Changes:
- New release 0.19

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #9 from Jakub Kadlčík  ---
Thank you for the update.

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

===== MUST items =====

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: "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown or generated". 37 files
     have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/jkadlcik/2073765-arch-test/licensecheck.txt
[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]: 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: 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 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.
[?]: 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 all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

Rpmlint
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:

Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts
============================
rpmlint: 2.2.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 32, packages: 1

arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/alpha
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/amd64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/arm
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/arm64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/arm64ilp32
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/armel
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/armhf
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/hppa
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/i386
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/ia64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/illumos-amd64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/kfreebsd-amd64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/kfreebsd-i386
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/m68k
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/mips
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/mips64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/mips64el
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/mipsel
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/mipsn32
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/mipsn32el
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/powerpc
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/powerpcspe
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/ppc64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/ppc64el
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/riscv64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/s390x
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/sh4
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/sparc
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/sparc64
arch-test.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/lib/arch-test/x32
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 30 errors, 0 warnings, 30 badness; has
taken 0.0 s

Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/kilobyte/arch-test/archive/v0.19.tar.gz#/arch-test-0.19.t...
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
a0361ff3d6d9066773065760e4128bc97ebfa2f4cae69522e4dcc614337d22a4
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
a0361ff3d6d9066773065760e4128bc97ebfa2f4cae69522e4dcc614337d22a4

Requires
--------
arch-test (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/perl
    /usr/bin/sh

Provides
--------
arch-test:
    arch-test

Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2073765
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: R, fonts, Java, Haskell, C/C++, Perl, Ocaml, SugarActivity,
PHP, Python
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

Jakub Kadlčík  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #10 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/arch-test

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |MODIFIED

--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-ad8fcbe904 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ad8fcbe904

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

Fedora Update System  changed:

What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|MODIFIED                    |CLOSED
         Resolution|---                         |ERRATA
        Last Closed|                            |2022-10-03 16:18:12

--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-ad8fcbe904 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810 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-2022-cfd7a48810 *`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-ffa3f360f0 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-ffa3f360f0 *`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ffa3f360f0

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863 *`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-eb67dbc863 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-ffa3f360f0 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

[Bug 2073765] Review Request: arch-test - Tools to detect architectures runnable by your machine+kernel

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2073765

--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2022-cfd7a48810 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.