https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2262694 --- Comment #13 from Luya Tshimbalanga <luya_tfz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Carlos Rodriguez-Fernandez from comment #12) > Thank you Luya for the updated version. > > ==LICENSE== > > After looking at the licenses, would you mind please changing it this way? > > > For package materialx: > --------------------- > > # All third-party components imported or incorporated are under MIT except > the following: > # ambientcg CC0-1.0 > # catch BSL-1.0 > # glfw Zlib > # nanogui BSD-4-Clause > # openimageio BSD-3-Clause > # openshadinglanguage BSD-3-Clause > # poly-haven CC0-1.0 > # pybind11 BSD-4-Clause > > License: MIT AND Apache-2.0 AND BSD-4-Clause AND CC0-1.0 AND > BSD-3-Clause AND BSL-1.0 AND Zlib > > > For subpackage libs: > ------------------- > > License: Apache-2.0 > > Fixed. > > %files > %license LICENSE > %license THIRD-PARTY.md > %doc CHANGELOG.md README.md SECURITY.md > The build system dislike adding extra %license for THIRD-PARTY.md so %doc was the only option. > > ==DIR OWNERSHIP== > > /usr/lib64/cmake/MaterialX has the wrong onwership. > Could you please change "%{_libdir}/cmake/MaterialX/*.cmake" to > "%{_libdir}/cmake/MaterialX/" to fix the ownership roblem? Fixed. > > ==DEPENDENCIES== > > Shouldn't the `python3-%{name}` depend on the libs? > Shouldn't the top level package itself with those artifacts depend on the > libs? > > For what I can understand upstream, all those components depend on the libs > to be installed, so I wonder if this should be structured differently. > Perhaps the top library should install the dyn libraries together with all > the resources (or the resources in a different subpackage), then a devel > package for the headers, and another one for python. That way they all > depend on the parent one cleanly. That takes me to the next thought that > perhaps the top package should be called `libmaterialx`. > Or something like materialx-osl due to the optional support of OSL? > > ==FHS== > > %{_libdir}/{bxdf,cmlib,lights,mdl,pbrlib,stdlib,targets} > > * These libraries are not ELF dynamic libraries. They should go to > /usr/share/materialx. > * They should be located under > materialx/{bxdf,cmlib,lights,mdl,pbrlib,stdlib,targets} > Fixed. > ==DEVEL AND LIBS== > > Could you please list the actual libraries instead of *.so and > *.so.{1,%{version}}? > Fixed. Here is the updated SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@designsuite/blender/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07005412-materialx/materialx.spec SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@designsuite/blender/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07005412-materialx/materialx-1.38.8-1.fc40.src.rpm -- 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=2262694 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202262694%23c13 -- _______________________________________________ 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
