lovell / lovell/sharp-libvips

Build metadata request: final librsvg Cargo resolution for 1.3.2 Linux packages

Open
#400 3 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

question
Dominant language
Shell
Stars
212
Forks
132
Avg merge
5h 18m
Merged PRs (30d)
11

Description

Thank you for maintaining these binary packages. Could you point me to retained dependency metadata for the librsvg component of the following published artifacts?

- `@img/sharp-libvips-linux-x64@1.3.2`
- `@img/sharp-libvips-linuxmusl-x64@1.3.2`
- Build repository commit: `4da6d14c0d59866adfb9d8cf52bcaa53846dc4f6`
- [Associated release CI run](https://github.com/lovell/sharp-libvips/actions/runs/28432216836)

### Existing information checked

I read the README licence section and THIRD-PARTY-NOTICES, including the distinction between the build scripts and bundled libraries. I also checked #120, #270 and #327; this request is not asking to relabel the binary packages as Apache-2.0.

The fixed build recipe changes librsvg features and runs `cargo update --workspace`, so its unmodified upstream Cargo.lock is not necessarily the final resolution. The npm provenance payload identifies the root source commit, but does not enumerate Rust transitive dependencies. The artifact API currently marks the associated run's build attachments as expired.

### Requested information

Is the final, post-update Cargo.lock (or equivalent exact dependency/build SBOM), enabled feature set, and related third-party notice index available for these glibc/musl binaries? Any retained information distinguishing actually linked components from build-only dependencies would also help.

A persistent link to existing build metadata is sufficient. If it was not retained, please clarify that limitation rather than reconstructing a different resolution from current dependencies. I am seeking traceability for the existing published package bytes, not asking for a rebuild or a legal/commercial-use guarantee.

Contributor guide

No contributing guide indexed for this repository

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start with the README licence section and THIRD-PARTY-NOTICES, then inspect build commit 4da6d14c0d59866adfb9d8cf52bcaa53846dc4f6 and the associated release CI run. Determine whether the final Cargo.lock, feature set, dependency/build SBOM, and notice index were retained for the listed glibc and musl artifacts. Done means providing persistent metadata links or clearly documenting that the information is unavailable.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
github-actions, rust, shell
Domain
build-system, documentation, release
Issue type
Documentation
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Active
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
45/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.