On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 11:53 AM Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 3:26 PM David Michael
<fedora.dm0(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:46 AM Fabio Valentini <decathorpe(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181020 cargo_toml
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181021 crc64
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181022 device_tree
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181023 event-manager
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181025 linux-loader
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181028 userfaultfd
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181029 userfaultfd-sys
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181030 versionize
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181033 versionize_derive
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181035 vm-allocator
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181036 vm-fdt
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181038 vm-superio
> > >
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2181039 firecracker
> > >
> > > And in case binary builds are useful, this is the Copr link again:
> > >
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/dm0/Firecracker
> >
> > Great, I'll go through the reviews over the next days.
>
> Thanks again for reviewing those. All of the crates are now in Fedora 37+.
>
> The last one, Firecracker itself, is still unassigned, though. Were
> you intending to review that as well or should I ask about it in
> devel? (While it's not automatically generated like the others, the
> spec is basically just running "cargo build" in a workspace.)
I planned on reviewing firecracker as well once all dependencies are
available (unless somebody beats me to it).
There's some other things I need to work on today, so I might not get
to it until tomorrow or this weekend.
Let me know if you don't expect to have time for this review for a
while, and I can ask about it on devel.
I saw the new supported-arches option in rust2rpm specifically
mentioned being used to allow enabling more features. Is that the
only intended use case, or could it be used in place of Exclu*eArch in
all lib crates? I'm specifically wondering about the linux-loader
crate here. While it isn't a feature dependency, allowing it to be
installed on unsupported platforms would support cross-compiling which
could be handy in general. (Firecracker has other dependencies like
kvm-ioctls that would also need to be updated for it to be
cross-compiled from an unsupported platform, but linux-loader is the
only affected package in this set.)
Thanks.
David