https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #2 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- SPEC: https://gist.github.com/frantisekz/2b8070d039b4a14498e61cf16c6c3511 I've taken it off copr for now, until we figure out what needs to be stripped from source tarball. -- 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=1942132 František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |2036099 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036099 [Bug 2036099] Review Request: intel-opencl-igc - Intel(R) Graphics Compiler for OpenCL(TM) -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On|2036098, 2036104 |2036135, 2036109 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036098 [Bug 2036098] Review Request: intel-opencl-clang - Library to compile OpenCL C kernels to SPIR-V modules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036104 [Bug 2036104] Review Request: llvm8.0 - The Low Level Virtual Machine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036109 [Bug 2036109] Review Request: intel-cm-compiler - Intel(R) C for Metal compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036135 [Bug 2036135] Review Request: intel-compute-runtime - Compute API support for Intel(R) graphics -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dominik(a)greysector.net --- Comment #4 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; --- Doesn't this need FE-Legal review, then? -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(ngompa13(a)gmail.co | |m) --- Comment #6 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; --- FWIW, the driver from your COPR is working for me (Intel 11th gen/Tiger Lake) well enough to play some videos using mpv with VAAPI hwaccel, which is really great. And with Firefox 96, VAAPI accelerated video playback is no longer crashing, either. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #8 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 Martin Stransky <stransky(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |stransky(a)redhat.com --- Comment #9 from Martin Stransky <stransky(a)redhat.com&gt; --- Love to see that, Thanks! -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 Bug 1942132 depends on bug 2036099, which changed state. Bug 2036099 Summary: Review Request: intel-igc - Intel(R) Graphics Compiler for OpenCL(TM) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2036099 What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #11 from Robert Mader <robert.mader(a)posteo.de&gt; --- Just for understanding: would it still be possible to request this to be part of a default setup? Or would that need to wait for Fedora 36? -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #13 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Where is strip.py -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #15 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; --- Has there been any progress on this package? I've upgraded one of my machines to F36 and I'm able to test this on hardware supported by intel-media-driver only (Intel Tiger Lake). -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #17 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... strip.py: https://gist.github.com/frantisekz/137f3d213ec6392b51def31255456f78 Patch to remove non-free codecs support entirely: https://gist.github.com/frantisekz/4932cf5b5b304163268c6c7386f61d0b This should(tm) be ready for legal and package review. THe driver is very barebones as we're currently skipping kernel compilation entirely ( https://github.com/intel/media-driver/issues/1356 ). -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #18 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- With Intel Arc GPUs now a thing, is this really x86-only now? You could use it with ARM or POWER based systems too... -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #20 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #18) The problem is this: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/intel-gmmlib/blob/rawhide/f/intel-gmml... Also, once the time comes to enable free kernels compilation, that'd require bunch of igc, cm, compute-runtime stuff (or leave the kernels off for non-x86 forever). We can get this in in x86 only and figure path forward later on. I remember I'd problems with bunch of Intel stuff regressing pretty often on non-x86 compared to x86 in the past. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #22 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated 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 - Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. Note: intel-media-driver.spec should be intel-media-driver-free.spec See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_spec_file_naming ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [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]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for licenses manually. [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 the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Bad spec filename: /home/ngompa/1942132-intel-media-driver/srpm- unpacked/intel-media-driver.spec See: (this test has no URL) [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 3 intel-media-driver-free.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 21.4.3-1 ['22.6.0-1.fc38', '22.6.0-1'] intel-media-driver-free.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libigfxcmrt.so 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 2.5 s Unversioned so-files -------------------- intel-media-driver-free: /usr/lib64/dri/iHD_drv_video.so intel-media-driver-free: /usr/lib64/libigfxcmrt.so Requires -------- intel-media-driver-free (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libigdgmm.so.12()(64bit) libigfxcmrt.so.7()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.8)(64bit) libva.so.2()(64bit) libva.so.2(VA_API_0.33.0)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) intel-media-driver-free-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): intel-media-driver-free-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- intel-media-driver-free: intel-media-driver-free intel-media-driver-free(x86-64) libigfxcmrt.so.7()(64bit) metainfo() metainfo(intel-media-driver.metainfo.xml) intel-media-driver-free-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) intel-media-driver-free-debuginfo intel-media-driver-free-debuginfo(x86-64) libigfxcmrt.so.7.2.0-22.6.0-1.fc38.x86_64.debug()(64bit) intel-media-driver-free-debugsource: intel-media-driver-free-debugsource intel-media-driver-free-debugsource(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1942132 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Ocaml, Python, SugarActivity, Java, fonts, PHP, Perl, R, Haskell Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #24 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) from comment #23) It is part of the driver, but I agree, this needs to be subpackaged out. The development headers and pkgconfig files should also be shipped in a devel package. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #26 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #28 from Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&gt; --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5227768 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-... Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #30 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) from comment #29) Well, the -free/-full split is an upstream intel-media-driver thing, not a libva thing. I've filed a ticket to ask for this: https://github.com/intel/media-driver/issues/1598 But I won't hold up this package on that unless I get an assertion that it'd happen reasonably quickly. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #32 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Why isn't the regular shared library split out into a subpackage rather than being in the devel subpackage? It doesn't belong in the main driver package, sure, but it also doesn't belong in the devel subpackage either. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #34 from Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&gt; --- Created attachment 1949453 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1949453&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 5227768 to 5620209 -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #36 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; --- I don't get why there is a libigfxcmrt sub-package out of this project. Is this used by some other component ? My understanding is that library is a fork of this project: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2114125 Now if intel-media-driver is the only user of the library, I don't get the problem to have it bundled at all. It will avoid the need of any ABI computation. Also it will ease the swap between the full featured and Until a solution is found WRT alternative version (https://github.com/intel/libva/issues/639 ), I would be okay to have a downstream patch with the iHD-free driver name added into libva. Please rename as appropriate. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #38 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to František Zatloukal from comment #37) I don't believe this is an acceptable route to fix this problem. We should test the environment.d solution before we do that. Upstream advises against patching the binary filename. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #40 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; --- (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #38) environment.d doesn't work in MATE, for example (i.e. nothing imports environment from systemd like GNOME or KDE does). -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #42 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Also a new version just came out, can you update to 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #44 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... Added strip.py . -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #46 from Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&gt; --- Created attachment 1953231 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1953231&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 5700638 to 5700735 -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #48 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... GEN10 iGPU support enabled. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #50 from Jakub Kadlčík <jkadlcik(a)redhat.com&gt; --- Created attachment 1953430 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1953430&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 5700735 to 5706040 -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(fzatlouk(a)redhat.c | |om) --- Comment #52 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; --- One last nitpick: ... -DVC1_Decode_Supported="no" \ -DAVC_Encode_VME_Supported="no" \ -DAVC_Encode_VDEnc_Supported="no" \ -DHEVC_Encode_VME_Supported="no" \ -DHEVC_Encode_VDEnc_Supported="no" \ -DAVC_Decode_Supported="no" \ -DHEVC_Decode_Supported="no" \ -DAVC_Decode_Supported="no" \ ... Could you sort these alphabetically? Also, could you post a message on legal mailing list to ask Fedora Legal folks about the status of their review of this code? -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #54 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik(a)greysector.net&gt; --- (In reply to František Zatloukal from comment #53) Thanks. No need, then. It's enough to know that evaluation is in progress. -- 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=1942132

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #56 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Why using the old vaapi naming scheme across the distro, for newer packages ? newer naming schema is more like having vaapi-driver in the name. Guideline is pretty clear on that the package name is derived from the source tarball! What justify that such guideline is arbitrary ignored ? Now one can add any virtual provides that make things fit! -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 Joshua Strobl <joshua(a)buddiesofbudgie.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |joshua(a)buddiesofbudgie.org --- Comment #57 from Joshua Strobl <joshua(a)buddiesofbudgie.org&gt; --- What is the status of this task? Is over 5 months the usual pace for legal to review this? Or is there an actual need to move this to the ML to ensure the discussion and topic does not get buried? intel-media-driver-free is used for hardware-accelerated AV1 encode and decode, for example on Intel Arc DG2. OBS Studio nowadays supports AV1-based streaming to supported platforms (YouTube currently) as well as local recording and in the case of ffmpeg, the pieces have fallen into place and should be around in the next release of ffmpeg. Soon enough, this will be the bottleneck, and I'd really like to see Fedora remain a viable platform for video-oriented content creators. -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mattdm(a)redhat.com Blocks|182235 (FE-Legal) | --- Comment #59 from Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com&gt; --- I'm lifting FE-Legal on this bug. We have been waiting for over a year on it, and I firmly believe we've done sufficient diligence on this front. I've also filed a Fedora Council ticket about the problems with FE-Legal: https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/471 František, can you please implement my feedback as mentioned in comment 55? Once that's done and the driver is revved to the latest version released two weeks ago, I will approve this for inclusion. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=182235 [Bug 182235] Fedora Legal Tracker -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(fzatlouk(a)redhat.c | |om) | --- Comment #60 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/frantisekz/intel-media... -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #62 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; --- libigfxcmrt is still built as a separate shared object, but as such, this is a dead project: https://github.com/intel/cmrt Please remove this sub-package unless you can point to any users ? Also according to version numbers in 23.4 is pre-release software (might need any ABI breaking update). please only import in rawhide for now. -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #64 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <kwizart(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to František Zatloukal from comment #63) End-users will have to swap to the full intel-media-driver by hands. Having this package might interfere with this process. I don't get what you mean by "once it's upstream" ? There is no plan to get this library into a separate project. This is backward. cmrt is now part of intel-media-driver and not meant as separate library. Thanks What I mean by 23.4 is pre-release is that any later 23.4 serie can mandates any higher libva library (or else) than what currently has f39. Also Intel VAAPI is know to silent break ABI from time to time, so even minor releases need to be carefully audited. At the end, we don't want to rebuild all libva userspace deps for a single driver update (even if we could do this in fedora/rpmfusion it will nevertheless break many legitimate copr users that might have different maintenance pace). I hope to have clarified the point. -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|POST |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |intel-media-driver-free-23. | |4.3-1.fc40 Last Closed| |2023-12-21 20:54:35 --- Comment #66 from František Zatloukal <fzatlouk(a)redhat.com&gt; --- Forgot to update this, the package is in the repositories, rawhide for now, f39 will come as soon as we get a stable 23.4.x release, if gmmlib and libva requirements aren't raised above f39 providers. -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1942132 --- Comment #68 from Michael Catanzaro <mcatanza(a)redhat.com&gt; --- The binary package you want is: libva-intel-media-driver -- 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=1942132 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=rep...