[Bug 2099576] Review Request: libkrun - Dynamic library providing Virtualization-based process isolation capabilities

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2099576



--- Comment #2 from Sergio Lopez <slopezpa@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Cole Robinson from comment #1)
> Looks good to me, setting fedora-review+
> 
> Some small comments and a few questions below:
> 
> 
> The Summary: field has trailing whitespace
> 
> > # libkrun tests require access to "/dev/kvm", which is usually not be available
> > # not available on build sandboxes.
> 
> drop the first 'not be available'
> 
> > # While this project is composed mostly by Rust code, this is not a
> 
> composed mostly of
> 
> > # As a result, we can't fully rely on rust-packaging for managing this package.
> > # Instead, we use some of it's tasks (cargo_prep and cargo_test) and combine
> 
> it's -> its

Thanks a lot for the review, I've just fixed this mistakes in the specfile.

> > # them with using the Makefile provided by the project. We also need to manage
> > # BuildRequires manually, as rust-packaging gets confused trying to generate
> > # them dynamically.
> 
> Not blocking, but: Having to maintain the static BuildRequires list for rust
> crates is kinda unfortunate. Is it something that could be fixed on
> rust-packaging side, or more fundamental? If it's fixable it'd be nice to
> file a bug and reference it here.

Right now rust-packaging gets confused about the target being a dynamic library
("crate-type = ["cdylib"] in Cargo lingo") and the fact this is a workspace
with multiples crates instead of a single crate. Both things should be fixable,
but I honestly wonder if it's worth doing so. I suspect libkrun is the
exception here. I'd wait to see if some other package pop ups with the same
needs before investing time in extending rust-packaging to deal with this.

> Also not blocking: Any reason not to ship a pkgconfig file? Vast majority of
> -devel packages on my machine have one

We don't have a .pc file upstream, I guess because our current consumers (crun
and krunvm) doesn't require it, but seems like a good idea to have one. I'll
create an issue upstream.

Sergio.


-- 
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
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2099576
_______________________________________________
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




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux