[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290
--- Comment #25 from Javier Martinez Canillas ---
(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #15)
> - Not needed anymore:
>
> %ldconfig_scriptlets
>
> %ldconfig_scriptlets ipa
>
> - %{_libdir}/libcamera*.so should be versioned, ask upstream to do so or do
> it locally for now. The unversioned should go into the devel subpackage then.
> See
[snip]
I think that addressed all the issues you pointed out and filed a new bug
2002417
as requested by Neal.
--
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Javier Martinez Canillas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2021-09-08 18:29:55 --- Comment #24 from Javier Martinez Canillas --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 2002417 *** -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #23 from Javier Martinez Canillas --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #22) > (In reply to Javier Martinez Canillas from comment #21) > > > > I will take on this bugzilla and try to move the libcamera packaging > > forward. > > Please close this BZ for a new review request, so that the eventual approval > will actually work properly. Ok, will do. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ngomp...@gmail.com --- Comment #22 from Neal Gompa --- (In reply to Javier Martinez Canillas from comment #21) > > I will take on this bugzilla and try to move the libcamera packaging forward. Please close this BZ for a new review request, so that the eventual approval will actually work properly. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290
--- Comment #21 from Javier Martinez Canillas ---
(In reply to Nicolas Dufresne from comment #19)
> Hi Folks, as libcamera is not yet to a point were it can be released with a
> version, I would recommend going further then just the Fedora packaging
> rules. I would suggest to patch libcamera to rename the library, I would
> propose libcamera-unstable.so.X.Y. This way, you can pretty much be
I would prefer to minimize the downstream patching if possible.
> guarantee to never clash with a stable version of the SO.
>
Discussed this with the upstream libcamera maintainers (Laurent Pinchart and
Kieran Bingham), they said that downstream distros can rely on the following:
1) The first commit would be considered version 0.0.0 (they will tag it).
2) If they ever bump the 'version' field in the meson.build file, they will
tag that commit as well. So even when they won't release tarballs until
there is a stable API, distros can follow that versioning in packages.
3) The first stable release will be 1.0 and they will both tag the commit and
release a tarball when this happens.
I believe is safe given these assumptions to use the 'Version: 0.0.0' and
'Release: 0.1%{?snapshot:.%{snapshot}}%{?dist}' as pbrobinson did in his SPEC.
Fedora can then bump the 'Version' if upstream bumps theirs, and just the 0.x
in the 'Release' if the package is rebased to a newer git snapshot.
Maybe even using just 'Release: 1%{?snapshot:.%{snapshot}}%{?dist}' since the
'Version' already contains 0.0.0, making it clear that's a non stable version.
I will take on this bugzilla and try to move the libcamera packaging forward.
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Javier Martinez Canillas changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fmart...@redhat.com -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #20 from Dave Olsthoorn --- Created attachment 1805238 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1805238&action=edit libcamera patch for unstable name Here is a patch adding the unstable postfix to the library name, it also overrides the pkgconfig filenames back to the original names to allow it to be used. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Nicolas Dufresne changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nico...@ndufresne.ca --- Comment #19 from Nicolas Dufresne --- Hi Folks, as libcamera is not yet to a point were it can be released with a version, I would recommend going further then just the Fedora packaging rules. I would suggest to patch libcamera to rename the library, I would propose libcamera-unstable.so.X.Y. This way, you can pretty much be guarantee to never clash with a stable version of the SO. As for the users of libcamera, the GStreamer element rely on stable GStreamer release, but unstable libcamera, and that's why we placed inside libcamera. For the SPA plugin, inside of PipeWire, it depends on both unstable libcamera and SPA interface. Someone had to decide. Note that the libcamera SPA plugin is mostly a proof-of-concept. It is meant to cover the legacy use cases, single stream, that is covered by the V4L2 SPA plugin. It is also not very "real time" friendly, as libcamera API does a lot of run-time allocation. A proper libcamera / PipeWire integration will be needed to allow configuring multiple streams on the RPi or other modern SoC (including Intel IPU3) based cameras. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #18 from Javier Martinez Canillas --- (In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #17) > > I wonder how we should proceed, if having a downstream patch to add a .so > > name > > versioning as suggested in Comment #3 (and deal with any fallout caused by > > the > > API/ABI to change before they cut a versioned release) or just wait until > > they > > do that... > > The problem we have with patching it downstream if we end up with a > conflicting versioning, or if we have to patch any app/library that may > currently support libcamera to support the versioned libraries. > > I suppose the real question is what users outside of the libcamera included > utilities do we currently have to utilise libcamera? AKA what currently has > support for it? The only user I know about (because the GStreamer element is currently part of libcamera as well) is PipeWire (when built with -Dlibcamera=true): https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/pipewire/pipewire/-/tree/master/spa/plugins/libcamera Since having libcamera is the only way to support the camera in some devices (i.e: rpi4), I think that I'm leaning towards carry a downstream patch in the meantime. I'm happy to take over this pkg and also coordinate with Wim for the PipeWire bits. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #17 from Peter Robinson --- > I wonder how we should proceed, if having a downstream patch to add a .so > name > versioning as suggested in Comment #3 (and deal with any fallout caused by > the > API/ABI to change before they cut a versioned release) or just wait until > they > do that... The problem we have with patching it downstream if we end up with a conflicting versioning, or if we have to patch any app/library that may currently support libcamera to support the versioned libraries. I suppose the real question is what users outside of the libcamera included utilities do we currently have to utilise libcamera? AKA what currently has support for it? -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Javier Martinez Canillas changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fmart...@redhat.com --- Comment #16 from Javier Martinez Canillas --- (In reply to Peter Robinson from comment #12) > I'll update this review shortly. > > Still no versioned releases as yet, I'll reach out to upstream and see what > their latest plans are, it's been a little while since I checked in with > them. I've asked about this in the #libcamera channel today and the maintainer told me the following: | javierm: very very tentatively, I'd say in ~6 months I wonder how we should proceed, if having a downstream patch to add a .so name versioning as suggested in Comment #3 (and deal with any fallout caused by the API/ABI to change before they cut a versioned release) or just wait until they do that... -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290
--- Comment #15 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
- Not needed anymore:
%ldconfig_scriptlets
%ldconfig_scriptlets ipa
- %{_libdir}/libcamera*.so should be versioned, ask upstream to do so or do it
locally for now. The unversioned should go into the devel subpackage then.
See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_downstream_so_name_versioning
- The valid versioning for snapshots is as follow:
Either MMDD.
or MMDD
See
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_snapshots
Release: 0.2%{?snapshot:.%{snapshotdate}git%{snapshot}}%{?dist}
- Instead of providing the entire LICENSES folder, could you just include the
ones that are actually used (LGPLv2.1+ and GPLv2)
- Use %global not %define:
%global _lto_cflags %{nil}
- Please split the description to stay below 80 characters per line:
libcamera.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C libcamera is a library that
deals with heavy hardware image processing operations
libcamera.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C of complex camera devices that
are shared between the linux host all while allowing
libcamera.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C offload of certain aspects to
the control of complex camera hardware such as ISPs.
libcamera.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C Hardware support includes USB
UVC cameras, libv4l cameras as well as more complex
- Valid license shorthand is LGPLv2+:
libcamera.x86_64: W: invalid-license LGPLv2.1+
- You must delete the Sphinx build leftovers:
libcamera-docs.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/libcamera-0.0.0/html/.buildinfo
libcamera-docs.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/libcamera-0.0.0/html/.doctrees
libcamera-docs.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/libcamera-0.0.0/html/.doctrees
- Escape the macros in comments with two %:
libcamera.src:13: W: macro-in-comment %{name}
libcamera.src:13: W: macro-in-comment %{snapshot}
libcamera.src:13: W: macro-in-comment %{snapshot}
libcamera.src:13: W: macro-in-comment %{name}
libcamera.src:13: W: macro-in-comment %{snapshot}
libcamera.src: E: specfile-error warning: Macro expanded in comment on line 13:
%{name}-%{snapshot}/ %{snapshot} | xz > %{name}-%{snapshot}.tar.xz
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files directly in %_libdir.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/#_devel_packages
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Expat License GNU
Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1 GNU General Public License,
Version 2 Apache License 2.0", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0",
"BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised"
License", "*No copyright* Creative Commons CC0 Universal 1.0 Public
Domain Dedication", "GNU General Public License, Version 2", "GNU
Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "[generated file]", "*No
copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "BSD
3-clause "New" or "Revised" License GNU General Public License v2.0 or
later", "GNU General Public License, Version 2 [obsolete FSF postal
address (Temple Place)]", "Apache License 2.0". 852 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/libcamera/review-libcamera/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
must be documented in the spec.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[!]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to t
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #14 from Peter Robinson --- SPEC: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/libcamera.spec SRPM: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/libcamera-0.0.0-0.2.76a5861.fc34.src.rpm koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=65224529 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #13 from Peter Robinson --- SPEC: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/libcamera.spec SRPM: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/libcamera-0.0.0-0.2.76a5861.fc34.src.rpm koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=65221328 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #12 from Peter Robinson --- I'll update this review shortly. Still no versioned releases as yet, I'll reach out to upstream and see what their latest plans are, it's been a little while since I checked in with them. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 jask...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jask...@gmail.com --- Comment #11 from jask...@gmail.com --- FYI PipeWire recently started compiling against libcamera, so just a heads up, and I guess libcamera doesn't exactly have a versioned release yet either. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #10 from Peter Robinson --- I have this on my list for post F-33 GA to revisit. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #9 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- (In reply to Dave Olsthoorn from comment #8) > Since I was looking at libcamera for another project I rebased the spec file > and made some other changes: > - Add %check, it passed locally, but somehow not on koji > - Splitting the existing package into muliple packages: separate docs, ipa > modules and utilities > - Disabling LTO, it broke the tests in %check > - Adding some BuildRequires for new things: qcam, gstreamer plugin, ipa > module signing and more > Feel free to ignore if you don't want the changes I made: > > SPEC: > https://daveo.fedorapeople.org/review/libcamera/0.0.0-0.2.6f09a61/libcamera. > spec > SRPM: > https://daveo.fedorapeople.org/review/libcamera/0.0.0-0.2.6f09a61/libcamera- > 0.0.0-0.2.6f09a61.fc34.src.rpm > > FAS: daveo > > koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51300458 Youneed to work with PRobinson on this, I can't approved a package for someone who is not the reporter. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Dave Olsthoorn changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dave.olstho...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Dave Olsthoorn --- Since I was looking at libcamera for another project I rebased the spec file and made some other changes: - Add %check, it passed locally, but somehow not on koji - Splitting the existing package into muliple packages: separate docs, ipa modules and utilities - Disabling LTO, it broke the tests in %check - Adding some BuildRequires for new things: qcam, gstreamer plugin, ipa module signing and more Feel free to ignore if you don't want the changes I made: SPEC: https://daveo.fedorapeople.org/review/libcamera/0.0.0-0.2.6f09a61/libcamera.spec SRPM: https://daveo.fedorapeople.org/review/libcamera/0.0.0-0.2.6f09a61/libcamera-0.0.0-0.2.6f09a61.fc34.src.rpm FAS: daveo koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51300458 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #7 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- NEEDINFO me when you're ready. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
needinfo canceled: [Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Peter Robinson has canceled Package Review 's request for Peter Robinson 's needinfo: Bug 1738290: Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #6 from Peter Robinson --- Still working with upstream, will look at a rebase shortly. It's the way the new Raspberry Pi camera is supported so we still need it. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Peter Robinson changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(pbrobinson@gmail. | |com)| --- Comment #6 from Peter Robinson --- Still working with upstream, will look at a rebase shortly. It's the way the new Raspberry Pi camera is supported so we still need it. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #4 from Peter Robinson --- > - Ask upstream to add soname versioning to their library. If they refuse, > do it downstream: > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > #_downstream_so_name_versioning I've spoken with upstream and they will be adding so name versioning closer to the first release, they don't feel it's ready for that yet and all the tools that currently use it are internal to the repo. Once they start adding support to things like gstreamer they will be versioning it. -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290
Robert-André Mauchin changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from Robert-André Mauchin ---
%global commit 36d62298b20bec1f052fac04fd3011511cc29226
%global shortcommit %(c=%{commit}; echo ${c:0:7})
%global snapshotdate20190809
Name:libcamera
Version: 0
Release: 0.1%{?commit:.%{snapshotdate}git%{shortcommit}}%{?dist}
- Ask upstream to add soname versioning to their library. If they refuse, do
it downstream:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_downstream_so_name_versioning
--
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
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xav...@bachelot.org --- Comment #2 from Xavier Bachelot --- Some notes from parsing the spec quickly : - The SCM and snapshot date should be mentioned in the Release: tag. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/ - Even if you're packaging a snapshot, you can have a full URL in Source0. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ - I guess there's no versioned soname yet ? -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 --- Comment #1 from Peter Robinson --- koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=36835718 -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1738290] Review Request: libcamera - A library to support complex camera ISPs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1738290 Peter Robinson changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1269538 (IoT) Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1269538 [Bug 1269538] Tracker for IoT on Fedora -- 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 ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org 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@lists.fedoraproject.org
