https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2085444 --- Comment #76 from Daniel Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Yunying Sun from comment #75) > We've just made an update for spec and srpm, also updated from release 2.20 > to 2.22: > https://yunyings.fedorapeople.org/sgxsdk-devel.spec > https://yunyings.fedorapeople.org/sgxsdk-devel-2.22.100.0-1.fc40.src.rpm > > Koji build succeeded: > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106465995 I don't know what has changed, but I am unable to reproduce that myself. It fails to build in both Fedora 38 and rawhide, both in koji and locally https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106842730 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106841867 > Main updates: > 1. Main binary package is renamed to sgxsdk-devel, sample code package is > added back and renamed to sgxsdk-examples. So slight mis-understanding here. The package / specfile should still be called 'sgxsdk', but it should create a sgxsgk-devel binary RPM as output. This is achieved by leaving the defualt %files section empty, meaning it won't create a 'sgxsdk' binary RPM, only the various sub-RPMs we define. This is the change that ought to achieve that, though I can't test it fully since I can't get the package to successfully build: $ diff -u sgxsdk-devel.spec~ sgxsdk-devel.spec --- sgxsdk-devel.spec~ 2023-09-21 04:18:48.000000000 +0100 +++ sgxsdk-devel.spec 2023-09-28 14:00:27.984540597 +0100 @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ # SGX SDK is for development use only hence no deubg package needed. %define debug_package %{nil} -Name: sgxsdk-devel +Name: sgxsdk Version: 2.22.100.0 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Intel SGX SDK @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ # ./linux/installer/rpm/sdk/build.sh to update spec and repack tarball. # Since no network access is possible for Fedora package build system, # the pre-downloaded and repacked tarball is shared on 01.org. -Source0: https://download.01.org/intel-sgx/sgx_repo/rpm_onespec/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz +Source0: https://download.01.org/intel-sgx/sgx_repo/rpm_onespec/%{name}-devel-%{version}.tar.gz BuildRequires: autoconf BuildRequires: automake @@ -67,13 +67,22 @@ that allows software developers to create and debug Intel SGX enabled applications in C/C++. -%package -n sgxsdk-examples +%package devel +Summary: Intel SGX SDK + +%description devel +The Intel SGX SDK is a collection of APIs, libraries, documentation, and tools +that allows software developers to create and debug Intel SGX enabled +applications in C/C++. + + +%package examples Summary: Intel SGX SDK Sample Code Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release} Requires: libsgx-urts >= %{version}-%{release} Requires: libsgx-enclave-common >= %{version}-%{release} -%description -n sgxsdk-examples +%description examples The Intel SGX SDK sample code projects show developers how to create an enclave, how to use C++11 library inside the enclave, how to do local attestation and remote attestation, etc. @@ -87,7 +96,7 @@ %install %make_install -%files +%files devel %license License.txt %{_bindir}/sgx_config_cpusvn %{_bindir}/sgx_edger8r @@ -151,7 +160,7 @@ %{_datadir}/sgxsdk/libc++_Changes_SGX.txt %exclude %{_datadir}/sgxsdk/SampleCode/ -%files -n sgxsdk-examples +%files examples %{_datadir}/sgxsdk/SampleCode/ %changelog > 5. Updated licenses to follow SPDX expressions. This doesn't pass a check with 'license-validate' license-validate "BSD-3-Clause AND Apache-2.0 AND MIT AND OpenSSL AND ISC AND BSD-2-Clause AND GPL-2.0-only AND SMLNJ AND NCSA AND BSD-2-Clause-NetBSD AND Apache-1.0 AND FSFAP AND BSD-4-Clause-UC AND FSFUL AND Zlib AND (Apache-2.0 OR GPL-2.0-or-later) AND EPL-1.0 AND MS-PL AND BSD-4-Clause" No terminal defined for '-' at line 1 col 126 only AND SMLNJ AND NCSA AND BSD-2-Clause-NetBSD AND Apache-1.0 AND FSFAP AND BSD ^ Expecting: {'AND', 'OR'} the problem is that "BSD-2-Clause-NetBSD" is not an approved Fedora license https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/ Fortunately this time it seems this is just a minor technicality: https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/194 It was deprecated by SPDX, because it was legally identical to BSD-2-Clause. IOW, just remove the mention of "BSD-2-Clause-NetBSD" > Open issue: > 1. The dlmalloc CC0 license issue is not included this time in "License:" > field. In email author of dlmalloc is willing to change license, but new > release with new license is not published yet. > We will update SGX release, as well as this package, to incorporate new > dlmalloc version once its license update is done. Yep, understood. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2085444 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202085444%23c76 _______________________________________________ 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
