https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1919639

            Bug ID: 1919639
           Summary: Review Request: DOSBox-X - DOS/x86 emulator
           Product: Fedora
           Version: rawhide
            Status: NEW
         Component: Package Review
          Assignee: [email protected]
          Reporter: [email protected]
        QA Contact: [email protected]
                CC: [email protected]
  Target Milestone: ---
    Classification: Fedora



Created attachment 1750230
  --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1750230&action=edit
DOSBox-X spec file

Website: https://dosbox-x.com
github: https://github.com/joncampbell123/dosbox-x
F33 build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=60355367

Fedora Account System Username: rob72

I am a contributor of the dosbox-x project, and have been requested by the team
to submit this request. I am not a Fedora packager and need a sponsor.

Hans de Goede had expressed interest in us submitting this.

DOSBox-X provides a long list of enhancements compared to regular DOSBox (or
DOSBox staging). You can find an overview of some of the enhancements on the
flathub page: https://flathub.org/apps/details/com.dosbox_x.DOSBox-X where you
can also see the metainfo.

One possible limitation of DOSBox-X, is that its dynamic recompiler only works
on x86, x86_64, arm and aarch64, and will not compile on ppc or s390x. As such
the spec file contains the statement: ExclusiveArch: %{ix86} %{arm} x86_64
aarch64

DOSBox-X is typically updated once a month with a new release.


-- 
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 -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
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/[email protected]

Reply via email to