[Bug 838608] Review Request: shim - first stage UEFI bootloader

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838608

Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin at redhat.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |nalin at redhat.com

--- Comment #1 from Nalin Dahyabhai <nalin at redhat.com> ---
Using https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines as a reference:

MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
shim.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) bootloader -> boot loader,
boot-loader, boatload
shim.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bootloader -> boot loader,
boot-loader, boatload
shim.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) bootloader -> boot loader,
boot-loader, boatload
shim.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bootloader -> boot loader,
boot-loader, boatload
shim.x86_64: E: no-binary
shim-debuginfo.x86_64: E: empty-debuginfo-package
Spelling isn't really an issue here if the term is accurate.
FIX? The build process produces a shim.efi.debug file -- is that supposed to be
in the debuginfo package, or are we expecting that there won't be any because
the binary is not ELF?

MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK: No official project site, but the name meets the guidelines and is
consistent with comments in the main source file.

MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK: shim.spec

MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines 
OK

MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
CHECK: The stated license (MIT) is acceptable, though linking with (a partial
bundled) OpenSSL libcrypto and with libgnuefi at the same time could be
problematic.

MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
FIX? The notes in COPYRIGHT appear to match BSD (2 clause variant) as listed at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/BSD#2ClauseBSD more closely than
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/MIT, though both are free licenses.

MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
OK

MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK

MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK

MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK: tarball in source RPM matches tarball at location specified in .spec file.

MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: built on fedora-rawhide-x86_64 with mock

MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
FIX? Does this need to be "ExclusiveArch: i686 x86_64 ia64" or similar, as
gnu-efi, which is one of this package's build requirements, is?

MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK

MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
N/A

MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
N/A

MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
FIX: Are the -mno-red-zone flag and static linking the main reasons for
bundling OpenSSL's libcrypto here?  Can comments be added to the .spec file so
that the rationale is known?

MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
N/A

MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does create
that directory.
FIX: The package includes /boot/efi/EFI/redhat/shim.efi; the gnu-efi package
provides /boot/efi/EFI/redhat, but this package doesn't require gnu-efi. 
Please add a "Requires: gnu-efi" to ensure that the directory is owned while
the package is installed.

MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
OK

MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example.
FIX: Please specify the desired permissions when calling 'install' during the
%install phase.

MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK

MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK

MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
N/A

MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
OK

MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
MUST: Development files must be in a -devel package.
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,
and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does not need
a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
N/A

MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time.
OK

MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
OK

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.