https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Bug ID: 2120119 Summary: Review Request: waydroid - run android applications on wayland Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: ales.astone@gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/waydroid/waydroid/raw/main/f/waydroid.spec SRPM URL: https://pagure.io/waydroid/waydroid Description: A container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux system. Fedora Account System Username: aleasto
I already contribute to fedora in the form of pull-requests and dev chat in IRC, mostly with the KDE SIG. However, this is my first package submission so I do need a sponsor. I'm also a waydroid contributor and maintainer at https://github.com/waydroid
This package requires the following new dependencies: https://pagure.io/waydroid/libglibutil https://pagure.io/waydroid/libgbinder https://pagure.io/waydroid/python-gbinder https://pagure.io/waydroid/python-pyclip
For the best user experience (namely being able to use waydroid without ever touching the terminal and becoming root), this package should have its systemd unit automatically *enabled* and *started* on install. I understand this requires being allow-listed in /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/
I currently provide working builds through copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/aleasto/waydroid/ For the copr purpose I currently include a systemd preset file in the waydroid rpm. This will be removed for the official package.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #1 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- A note on legal: On first launch waydroid needs to download the Android image files. These are source built from LineageOS plus some patches. LineageOS contains various projects with different permissive licenses, however it also includes FFMPEG to enable media consumption. For this reason, I believe this package is not allowed to contain a link to such image files, as per point 3 of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:SoftwareTypes#Emulators
In the specfile I am thus removing these links and leaving it to the user to insert the correct links when launching waydroid, as they can be found on the waydroid webpage and documentation.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #2 from Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com ---
This package requires the following new dependencies: https://pagure.io/waydroid/libglibutil https://pagure.io/waydroid/libgbinder https://pagure.io/waydroid/python-gbinder https://pagure.io/waydroid/python-pyclip
These need to be done as separate reviews and linked a blockers to this review as it's unusable with out them so they need to go first.
For the best user experience (namely being able to use waydroid without ever touching the terminal and becoming root), this package should have its systemd unit automatically *enabled* and *started* on install. I understand this requires being allow-listed in /usr/lib/systemd/system-preset/
That's a different process that can be dealt with once it's actually in Fedora.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |decathorpe@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- (In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #1)
A note on legal: On first launch waydroid needs to download the Android image files.
This sounds like waydroid will not be functional without these images?
If that is the case, it might run afoul of this section of the packaging guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be-packag...
In particular:
This also means that packages which are not functional or useful without code or packages from third-party sources are not acceptable for inclusion in Fedora.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #4 from Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com ---
This also means that packages which are not functional or useful without code or packages from third-party sources are not acceptable for inclusion in Fedora.
There's other examples of this in Fedora like some of the games eg I don't believe Doom/Quake engines ship with all the game files (not 100% sure of this).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #5 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #3)
(In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #1)
A note on legal: On first launch waydroid needs to download the Android image files.
This sounds like waydroid will not be functional without these images?
If that is the case, it might run afoul of this section of the packaging guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/what-can-be- packaged/#_packages_which_are_not_useful_without_external_code
In particular:
This also means that packages which are not functional or useful without code or packages from third-party sources are not acceptable for inclusion in Fedora.
How is any game console emulator allowed then?
One could also argue that you can self compile android images and configure waydroid to use those.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #6 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- (In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #5)
How is any game console emulator allowed then?
I think the difference is that they don't need third-party (non-packaged) code *to run*, but they are able to *run* third-party code OOTB.
One could also argue that you can self compile android images and configure waydroid to use those.
This is probably a high burden for most users :(
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |2120129
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120129 [Bug 2120129] Review Request: python-pyclip - python module for clipboard
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #7 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #6)
(In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #5)
How is any game console emulator allowed then?
I think the difference is that they don't need third-party (non-packaged) code *to run*, but they are able to *run* third-party code OOTB.
What does an emulator run without rom files? If showing a GUI telling the user to download some rom files counts, then that's exactly what waydroid does.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |2120130
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120130 [Bug 2120130] Review Request: python-gbinder - python bindings for libgbinder
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #8 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- (In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #7)
What does an emulator run without rom files? If showing a GUI telling the user to download some rom files counts, then that's exactly what waydroid does.
The purpose of an emulator is to run user-supplied ROM files. This functionality works OOTB.
The purpose of waydroid, as I understand, is to run user-supplied Android apps. This will not work OOTB, as it first requires an additional download of third-party content (other than the actual Android app).
This might sound pedantic, but it's a possibly important difference.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #9 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- (In reply to Fabio Valentini from comment #8)
(In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #7)
What does an emulator run without rom files? If showing a GUI telling the user to download some rom files counts, then that's exactly what waydroid does.
The purpose of an emulator is to run user-supplied ROM files. This functionality works OOTB.
The purpose of waydroid, as I understand, is to run user-supplied Android apps. This will not work OOTB, as it first requires an additional download of third-party content (other than the actual Android app).
This might sound pedantic, but it's a possibly important difference.
How about the purpose of waydroid is to boot an android system as a linux container? ^^ Waydroid is merely a python script that spawns an LXC container that uses an android system image as chroot. By default it will boot to the android homescreen. It then has some utilities to install and launch individual apps.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #10 from Fabio Valentini decathorpe@gmail.com --- (In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #9)
How about the purpose of waydroid is to boot an android system as a linux container? ^^ Waydroid is merely a python script that spawns an LXC container that uses an android system image as chroot. By default it will boot to the android homescreen. It then has some utilities to install and launch individual apps.
If you present it like that, it certainly sounds more acceptable ;)
I didn't want to deter you from packaging this - I think having it in Fedora would be a great addition. I just wanted to make you aware that there are rules that *might* be interpreted in a way that could prevent waydroid from being added as an official Fedora package.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #11 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- In case anyone is currently trying waydroid out there's a kernel bug with the binder driver that prevents waydroid from working on kernels 5.18.18 and up, and 5.19.2 and up. Patch is pending merge...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #12 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- (In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #11)
In case anyone is currently trying waydroid out there's a kernel bug with the binder driver that prevents waydroid from working on kernels 5.18.18 and up, and 5.19.2 and up. Patch is pending merge...
This is resolved now with kernel 5.19.6
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #13 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- Latest package:
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/waydroid/waydroid/raw/main/f/waydroid.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #14 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- Some fixes:
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/waydroid/waydroid/raw/main/f/waydroid.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119 Bug 2120119 depends on bug 2120129, which changed state.
Bug 2120129 Summary: Review Request: python-pyclip - python module for clipboard https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120129
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119 Bug 2120119 depends on bug 2120130, which changed state.
Bug 2120130 Summary: Review Request: python-gbinder - python bindings for libgbinder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120130
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #15 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- New version:
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r...
Also all dependencies have now been imported to fedora 36+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |ngompa13@gmail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |ngompa13@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #16 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Taking this review.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #17 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Initial spec review:
%global debug_package %{nil}
Why are we doing this?
Summary: waydroid
This is not a valid summary
Patch0: setup-firealld.patch
Typo?
Requires: (%{name}-selinux = %{version}-%{release} if selinux-policy-targeted)
Shouldn't this be "selinux-policy-%{selinuxtype}"?
Requires: nftables iproute dnsmasq
Please put these on their own lines
Recommends: python-pyclip
This doesn't exist?
waydroid upgrade -o >/dev/null
What happens when this fails? We can't have package transactions failing because of failed commands.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #18 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #17)
%global debug_package %{nil}
Why are we doing this?
""" Processing files: waydroid-debugsource-1.3.4-2.fc37.x86_64 error: Empty %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/waydroid-1.3.4/debugsourcefiles.list RPM build errors: Empty %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/waydroid-1.3.4/debugsourcefiles.list """
Recommends: python-pyclip
This doesn't exist?
This is one of the dependencies i packaged and i'm now maintaining: https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/python-pyclip/ Do you mean it should be Recommends: python3-pyclip instead or..?
waydroid upgrade -o >/dev/null
What happens when this fails? We can't have package transactions failing because of failed commands.
Right, i'll add `|| :`
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #19 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- (In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #18)
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #17)
%global debug_package %{nil}
Why are we doing this?
""" Processing files: waydroid-debugsource-1.3.4-2.fc37.x86_64 error: Empty %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/waydroid-1.3.4/debugsourcefiles.list RPM build errors: Empty %files file /builddir/build/BUILD/waydroid-1.3.4/debugsourcefiles.list """
It seems like this package should be noarch entirely? It doesn't have any arch-specific stuff.
Recommends: python-pyclip
This doesn't exist?
This is one of the dependencies i packaged and i'm now maintaining: https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/python-pyclip/ Do you mean it should be Recommends: python3-pyclip instead or..?
Yeah, it should be python3-pyclip.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #20 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- Thanks. Addressed comments. Also improved sepolicy.
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #21 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com ---
Summary: A container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux system.
Drop the article adjective at the beginning and the period at the end.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #22 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- Done.
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #23 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com ---
Waydroid uses Linux namespaces to run a full Android system in a container and provide Android applications on any GNU/Linux-based platform. The Android system inside the container has direct access to needed hardware through LXC and the binder interface.
Text needs to be wrapped at 79 columns.
%{_systemd_util_dir}/system-preset/95-waydroid.preset
Presets are not allowed in any package except fedora-release. You'll need to make a request for fedora-release to include it.
Cf. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/DefaultServices/#_...
if [ $1 -eq 1 ] && [ -x /usr/bin/systemctl ]; then /usr/bin/systemctl start waydroid-container.service || : fi
This should also check if the service is enabled before attempting to start it. Here's an example: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/snapd/blob/rawhide/f/snapd.spec#_877-885
%triggerin -- %{name} < 1.2.1-13 /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper mark-restart-system-units waydroid-container.service || :
What is this about? Also, this will probably never trigger since no package entering Fedora predates this version.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #24 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #23)
%{_systemd_util_dir}/system-preset/95-waydroid.preset
Presets are not allowed in any package except fedora-release. You'll need to make a request for fedora-release to include it.
Cf. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/DefaultServices/ #_how_to_enable_a_service_by_default
I'm aware. If you don't mind i'll keep it in the spec until there's no other remarks for the purpose of distributing via copr, without having to fork my git tree
%triggerin -- %{name} < 1.2.1-13 /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper mark-restart-system-units waydroid-container.service || :
What is this about? Also, this will probably never trigger since no package entering Fedora predates this version.
I had to get creative to restart the service when upgrading from an older release that did not include %systemd_postun_with_restart, to avoid an issue with having rewritten the whole sepolicy. Since then I've also added %systemd_postun_with_restart so yes, this will serve no purpose if you first install the package from @fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #25 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- (In reply to Alessandro Astone from comment #24)
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #23)
%{_systemd_util_dir}/system-preset/95-waydroid.preset
Presets are not allowed in any package except fedora-release. You'll need to make a request for fedora-release to include it.
Cf. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/DefaultServices/ #_how_to_enable_a_service_by_default
I'm aware. If you don't mind i'll keep it in the spec until there's no other remarks for the purpose of distributing via copr, without having to fork my git tree
I cannot approve a package that violates the policy in this manner, so you'll need to address it soon.
%triggerin -- %{name} < 1.2.1-13 /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-update-helper mark-restart-system-units waydroid-container.service || :
What is this about? Also, this will probably never trigger since no package entering Fedora predates this version.
I had to get creative to restart the service when upgrading from an older release that did not include %systemd_postun_with_restart, to avoid an issue with having rewritten the whole sepolicy. Since then I've also added %systemd_postun_with_restart so yes, this will serve no purpose if you first install the package from @fedora
Right.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #26 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- Done.
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #27 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
Issues: ======= - Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file. - systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in waydroid See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets
===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License, Version 3", "BSD 3-Clause License GNU General Public License v3.0 or later". 36 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ngompa/2120119-waydroid/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: 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. [x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: 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 20480 bytes in 2 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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [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
Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
===== 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} = %{version}-%{release} in waydroid-selinux [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [!]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-]: 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 ------- Checking: waydroid-1.3.4-2.fc38.noarch.rpm waydroid-selinux-1.3.4-2.fc38.noarch.rpm waydroid-1.3.4-2.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/tmpbx4lc8t1')] checks: 31, packages: 3
waydroid.noarch: E: summary-too-long Container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux system waydroid.src: E: summary-too-long Container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux system waydroid.spec: W: patch-not-applied Patch0: setup-firewalld.patch waydroid.spec: W: patch-not-applied Patch1: mount-secontext.patch waydroid.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib waydroid.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary waydroid waydroid.noarch: W: desktopfile-without-binary /usr/share/applications/Waydroid.desktop waydroid waydroid.noarch: W: desktopfile-without-binary /usr/share/applications/waydroid.market.desktop waydroid waydroid-selinux.noarch: W: dangerous-command-in-%pre cp waydroid-selinux.noarch: W: dangerous-command-in-%posttrans rm ============================================================================ 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 8 warnings, 2 badness; has taken 0.3 s ============================================================================
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- /bin/sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8) /bin/sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8) /bin/sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8) /bin/sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8) /bin/sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8) /bin/sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8) /bin/sh: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.UTF-8) ============================ 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: 2
waydroid.noarch: E: summary-too-long Container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux system waydroid.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib waydroid.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary waydroid waydroid-selinux.noarch: W: dangerous-command-in-%pre cp waydroid-selinux.noarch: W: dangerous-command-in-%posttrans rm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings, 1 badness; has taken 0.1 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/waydroid/waydroid/archive/1.3.4/waydroid-1.3.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 32e30e6c7384a514649daeac68b1326e2781362692ae143927628ff2f1387c4e CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 32e30e6c7384a514649daeac68b1326e2781362692ae143927628ff2f1387c4e
Requires -------- waydroid (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (waydroid-selinux = 1.3.4-2.fc38 if selinux-policy-targeted) /bin/sh /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/sh dnsmasq gtk3 iproute lxc nftables python3-gbinder python3-gobject
waydroid-selinux (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh container-selinux libselinux-utils policycoreutils policycoreutils-python-utils selinux-policy selinux-policy-base
Provides -------- waydroid: application() application(Waydroid.desktop) application(waydroid.market.desktop) metainfo() metainfo(id.waydro.waydroid.metainfo.xml) mimehandler(x-scheme-handler/market) waydroid
waydroid-selinux: waydroid-selinux
Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2120119 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Python, Generic Disabled plugins: fonts, C/C++, Ocaml, SugarActivity, PHP, Java, Haskell, R, Perl Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #28 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Issues: =======
- Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop- file-validate if there is such a file.
I think this is not having desktop-file-validate and appstream-util validate in %check.
Cf. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_desktop_file_ins...
Cf. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/AppData/#_app_data...
- systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in waydroid See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets
This is because "%systemd_post" is run in %posttrans rather than %post. I don't see a reason that this can't be moved to %post.
[!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} in waydroid-selinux
This should be an easy fix.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
Should be an easy fix.
waydroid.noarch: E: summary-too-long Container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux system waydroid.src: E: summary-too-long Container-based approach to boot a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux system
This needs to be shrunk to 79 columns.
Once these are resolved, I can approve this.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #29 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #28)
- systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files. Note: Systemd service file(s) in waydroid See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets
This is because "%systemd_post" is run in %posttrans rather than %post. I don't see a reason that this can't be moved to %post.
My memory is not super fresh but this is what i remember: The reasoning was that I needed the systemd service to (re)start *after* the selinux changes take place. Now, I see that my %selinux_relabel_post is also in %posttrans which I probably took from the first code snippet here https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SELinux/IndependentPolicy#The_%post_Section , so I put the %systemd_post in %posttrans as well because %post would be too soon.
However I see that the second code snippet in the same link above prefers putting them both in %post instead. As well as %systemd_postun_with_restart in `%post selinux` for when selinux is only installed after the main package. I'll verify whether it keeps the right behaviour and update the spec.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #30 from Alessandro Astone ales.astone@gmail.com --- Done.
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/aleasto/waydroid/fedora-r...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #31 from Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com --- Looks great!
PACKAGE APPROVED.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #32 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/waydroid
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-9360cde92d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9360cde92d
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-d5c219f4bc has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d5c219f4bc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-9360cde92d 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-2022-9360cde92d *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-9360cde92d
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=2120119
--- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-d5c219f4bc 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-d5c219f4bc *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-d5c219f4bc
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=2120119
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Last Closed| |2023-01-03 01:24:51
--- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-9360cde92d 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=2120119
Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2157810
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2157810 [Bug 2157810] systemd presets request - waydroid-container.service
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2120119
--- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-c1e1ab321a has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-c1e1ab321a` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c1e1ab321a
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=2120119
--- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-c1e1ab321a has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com