https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2332550 --- Comment #6 from Uri Lublin <uril@xxxxxxxxxx> --- Thank you Cole for reviewing ! (In reply to Cole Robinson from comment #5) > (In reply to Uri Lublin from comment #3) > > rust2rpm.toml: > ... > > > extra-sources = [ > > ] > > guess you can drop this bit, or is there a reason it's empty? Yes, it can be dropped. > > > , "comments" = [ "clap version is 4.5.19" ] }, > > Interesting that this seems to work fine when upstream's version string is > says they explicitly want 4.2. Do you know what that's about? Maybe want to > raise with upstream and mention in the patch comment. Without it (commenting out Patch10 in the spec-file) the build fails with: (crate(clap/default) >= 4.2.7 with crate(clap/default) < 4.3.0~) is needed by trustee-guest-components-0.10.0^124.git0061d03-1.fc42.x86_64 (crate(clap/derive) >= 4.2.7 with crate(clap/derive) < 4.3.0~) is needed by trustee-guest-components-0.10.0^124.git0061d03-1.fc42.x86_64 Running "dnf list rust-clap*-devel" shows there are rust-clap2 and rust-clap3 packages but no rust-clap4.2 packages. Commit 2d8dcd3 message says: versions: Downgrade clap - Downgrade clap to get to a version that builds on rust 1.69 - clap 4.3 states that it requires rust 1.65, but it pulls in clap_lex 0.5 as a dependency, which requires rust 1.70. The newest version of clap_lex that will build on 1.69 is 0.4 and the newest version of clap that depends on 0.4 is currently 4.2.7, which is how I got to this version Fixes: #336 Signed-off-by: stevenhorsman <steven@xxxxxxxxxx> --- In Fedora rust is 1.83 and rust-clap_lex-devel is 0.7.4. I can change it back to "4" instead of "4.5.19" if it's better. > > > > { "number" = 12, "file" = > > "0012-Fedora-kbs_protocol-Cargo.toml-add-package.license.patch" , "comments" > > = [ "add package.license to kbs_protocol/Cargo.toml" ] }, > > Something to raise with upstream? I'll ask upstream about it. > > > { "number" = 13, "file" = > > "0013-Fedora-tokio-version-is-1.41.patch" , "comments" = [ "tokio version is > > 1.41" ] }, > > tokio 1.42 is in fedora now, you can drop this Yes, I'll drop it. > > Does the package build without the un-reviewed cvm/vtpm bits enabled? If > it's simple to drop those, maybe do that, and then enable them in a follow > up commit once packages land, so this package isn't blocked. It can be built with an added patch to remove the Azure attesters, so that only snp-attester is enabled, or by modifying 0006-Fedora-attester-pick-attesters-in-all-attesters.patch diff --git a/attestation-agent/attester/Cargo.toml b/attestation-agent/attester/Cargo.toml index 4e16347..1451560 100644 --- a/attestation-agent/attester/Cargo.toml +++ b/attestation-agent/attester/Cargo.toml @@ -34,8 +34,6 @@ required-features = ["bin"] [features] default = ["all-attesters"] all-attesters = [ - "az-snp-vtpm-attester", - "az-tdx-vtpm-attester", "snp-attester", ] -- 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=2332550 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202332550%23c6 -- _______________________________________________ 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
