https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933988 code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? | |needinfo?(trpost@rocketmail | |.com) --- Comment #10 from code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Okay, I looked into it further, and it seems COPASI already implements option “1.” Look at https://github.com/copasi/COPASI/blob/0dddbe0d84e4248270ff65d06ea2b3997cc4f3b9/copasi/math/CJitCompiler.cpp to see how all JIT is disabled when a runtime CPU feature test shows SSE4 is not available. So from a policy perspective, everything is fine. You do need a quick feature test in the spec file to avoid running the tests on build hosts without SSE4.2 (like mine!). Your %check could look like this: if grep -E '\bsse4_2\b' /proc/cpuinfo >/dev/null then %ctest -- -VV else echo 'No SSE4.2 support on build host; skipping tests' 1>&2 fi Or, if it’s more to your liking, use the other package you have under review: BuildRequires: google-cpu_features BuildRequires: jq if list_cpu_features -j | jq -e '.flags | index("sse4_2")' >/dev/null then %ctest -- -VV else echo 'No SSE4.2 support on build host; skipping tests' 1>&2 fi Personally, I would favor also adding a comment near the ExcludeArch mentioning the SSE4.2 requirement and linking https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1044, and perhaps mentioning the SSE4.2 requirement in the package description as well. ----- Based on https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_listing_shared_library_files, you should write the shared library globs as %{_libdir}/libCodeGen.so.0 %{_libdir}/libNativeJIT.so.0 instead of %{_libdir}/libCodeGen.so.* %{_libdir}/libNativeJIT.so.* ----- I’m not a big fan of claiming something as vague and generic as /usr/include/Temporary, but I’m not sure there’s a reasonable way to avoid it. ----- I’m going to go ahead and claim this for review. Could you post an updated version that skips the tests when necessary and adjusts the shared library globs, and I’ll review that? Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
