https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2224629 --- Comment #9 from Fabio Valentini <decathorpe@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Tyler Fanelli from comment #7) > Thanks, I addressed those and squashed the commit. I suppose a good rule of > thumb is that you shouldn't modify any lines in which rust2rpm wrote? Not modify without good reason, I'd say. Sometimes the heuristics rust2rpm uses for determining the package Summary, %doc files, and %license files are wrong, and that needs to be corrected. And if rust2rpm produces something that's wrong, that should be reported as a bug instead of working around it in packages themselves. Other than that, yes, don't make more modifications than you need to. Since you need to regenerate spec files for every new version, any unnecessary manual changes that need to be preserved result in additional work. > Spec URL: > https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tylerfanelli/rpm-rust-snphost/main/rust- > snphost.spec > SRPM URL: > https://github.com/tylerfanelli/rpm-rust-snphost/raw/main/rust-snphost-0.1.2- > 1.src.rpm > Description: Administrative utility for AMD SEV-SNP > Fedora Account System Username: tfanelli Package looks good to me, with some exceptions: 1. It looks like the linked spec file is up to date, but the spec file inside the linked SRPM is outdated. They should match. 2. The checksum for the .crate source file and its contents doesn't match with a fresh download: Source checksums ---------------- https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/snphost/0.1.2/download#/snphost-0.1.2.crate : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1609a1baa1ce995e672b4561a878ee691f1286e7b832bb4bb1589b1b8ab2079c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 814c3cf08159ad2fb67c855b0739bfb0f72ee996719832324ddba4d02a0ab6d0 diff -r also reports differences Looks like the file was manually constructed, that's not OK (at least in most circumstances, and definitely if you're not giving steps to reproduce what you've done). In this case, the file should be obtained either by running "spectool -g rust-snphost.spec" or "rust2rpm -s snphost", otherwise it won't match the file downloaded from the specified Source URL. -- 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=2224629 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202224629%23c9 _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
