https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
Bug ID: 2094246 Summary: Review Request: gnunet - The GNUnet Peer-to-Peer Framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: schanzen@gnunet.org QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Hi,
this is my first packaging request. I am the co-maintainer of this GNU package and would be willing to maintain the Fedora RPM package for it. For now, I am doing this via Copr. I am still in need of a sponsor.
The package is currently divided into three parts:
- gnunet: The base component including most of the services and libraries - gnunet-*-plugins: Optional database plugins - gnunet-devel: The ususal headers etc - gnunet-bcd: A business card generation tool (needs latex) - gnunet-conversation: A VoP2P service (needs gtreamer et al.)
Cheers
Spec URL: https://git.gnunet.org/gnunet-rpm.git/log/?h=dev/schanzen/copr SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/schanzen/gnunet/fedora-ra... Copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/schanzen/gnunet Description: GNUnet is peer-to-peer framework providing a network abstractions and applications focusing on security and privacy. So far, we have created applications for anonymous file-sharing, decentralized naming and identity management, decentralized and confidential telephony and tunneling IP traffic over GNUnet. GNUnet is currently developed by a worldwide group of independent free software developers. GNUnet is a GNU package (http://www.gnu.org/). Fedora Account System Username: schanzen
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |benson_muite@emailplus.org
--- Comment #1 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Perhaps use:
SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/schanzen/gnunet/fedora-ra...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
--- Comment #3 from Martin Schanzenbach schanzen@gnunet.org --- Hi,
in the meantime I have been updating the package for every release and set the COPR build to build with fedora-review. The open issues seem to be: --
- Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
- 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. Note: License file libgnunet_plugin_rest_copying.so is not marked as %license See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text
=> This is probably a false positive regex match.
- systemd_user_post is invoked in %post and systemd_user_preun in %preun for Systemd user units service files. Note: Systemd user unit service file(s) in gnunet See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_units
=> I have no idea what the "issue" is with this. I followed the user unit guide.
=> Regarding some of the manual checks:
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/include/gnunet, /usr/share/doc/gnunet
=> I tried to get rid of this for hours. I have no idea what the issue is. The directories are declared with %dir.
[ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in libgnunet
=> So, libgnunet is the subpackage that is basically the core everything else depends upon. => The subpackage itself does not have any local Require's. I cannot get rid of this message.
gnunet-doc.noarch: E: files-duplicated-waste 318478
=> GNUnet 0.19.2 will fix this hopefully along with some man pages.
gnunet.x86_64: E: call-to-mktemp /usr/bin/gnunet-testing gnunet.x86_64: E: call-to-mktemp /usr/lib64/gnunet/libgnunet_plugin_datacache_sqlite.so gnunet.x86_64: E: call-to-mktemp /usr/lib64/libgnunetdatacache.so.0.0.1 gnunet.x86_64: E: call-to-mktemp /usr/lib64/libgnunetfs.so.2.1.1 libgnunet.x86_64: E: call-to-mktemp /usr/lib64/libgnunetutil.so.15.0.0
=> This results in 6 errors and does not make sense. The code never calls mktemp. In fact, it only calls mkstemp and mkdtemp: https://git.gnunet.org/gnunet.git/tree/src/util/disk.c#n380 --
I have added my review.txt as attachment. Happy new year.
Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review
Martin Schanzenbach schanzen@gnunet.org has canceled Package Review package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org's request for Martin Schanzenbach schanzen@gnunet.org's needinfo: Bug 2094246: Review Request: gnunet - The GNUnet Peer-to-Peer Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
--- Comment #6 from Martin Schanzenbach schanzen@gnunet.org --- (In reply to Package Review from comment #5)
This is an automatic check from review-stats script.
This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag.
You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.
Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience.
I am still interested in getting this packaged. I am currently working on moving the build system to meson, which will land in copr with the next release. The currently release is still on COPR (see links in OP)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
Martin Schanzenbach schanzen@gnunet.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(schanzen@gnunet.o | |rg) |
--- Comment #6 from Martin Schanzenbach schanzen@gnunet.org --- (In reply to Package Review from comment #5)
This is an automatic check from review-stats script.
This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag.
You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.
Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience.
I am still interested in getting this packaged. I am currently working on moving the build system to meson, which will land in copr with the next release. The currently release is still on COPR (see links in OP)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
david08741@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |david08741@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #7 from david08741@gmail.com --- Recent files:
SPEC: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/schanzen/gnunet/fedora-ra... SRPM: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/schanzen/gnunet/fedora-ra...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |benson_muite@emailplus.org Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #8 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- There are some false positives raised for unowned directories when using Fedora-review at present.
Can review, but cannot sponsor.
[fedora-review-service-build]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |https://%%7Bname%7D.org
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7452641 (failed)
Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.
- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network unavailability), please ignore it. - If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they are listed in the "Depends On" field
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
--- Comment #10 from Martin Schanzenbach schanzen@gnunet.org --- Hi,
the most recent version of gnunet is 0.21.1 and is also currently built here successfully:
- https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/schanzen/gnunet - https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/schanzen/gnunet/build/7164125/
You can find the respective spec files there, I guess. There is also a review output here: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/schanzen/gnunet/fedora-ra...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
--- Comment #11 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Initial comments: a) Requires is typically not needed for libraries as the tooling will automatically determine any libraries that are linked during the build process and ensure they are required if they are included in BuildRequires
b) For the desktop file add
BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils
to the spec file and in the check section add:
desktop-file-validate %{buildroot}/%{_datadir}/applications/gnunet-uri.desktop
see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_desktop_file_ins...
c) Group entry in spec file is typically not added
d) All licenses should be listed, not just the main license for the package. Based on https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/schanzen/gnunet/fedora-ra... would expect some of the following to be relevant for some of the sub packages: *No copyright* Public domain ---------------------------- gnunet-0.21.1/src/service/cadet/desirability_table.c
BSD 2-Clause License and/or BSD 2-clause NetBSD License ------------------------------------------------------- gnunet-0.21.1/src/cli/gns/gnunet-gns-proxy-setup-ca.in gnunet-0.21.1/src/service/transport/gnunet-transport-certificate-creation.in
BSD 3-Clause License -------------------- gnunet-0.21.1/src/lib/pq/versioning.sql gnunet-0.21.1/src/service/transport/ieee80211_radiotap.h
Creative Commons CC0 1.0 and/or GNU Affero General Public License v3.0 or later ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- gnunet-0.21.1/src/lib/util/crypto_elligator.c
See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-field/
e) should the section: %preun %systemd_preun %{name}.service
%postun %systemd_postun_with_restart %{name}.service %systemd_user_post %{name}-user.service
be changed to
%preun %systemd_preun %{name}.service %systemd_user_preun %{name}-user.service
%postun %systemd_postun_with_restart %{name}.service %systemd_user_postun %{name}-user.service
see: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_user_...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2094246
--- Comment #12 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- f) Still get directory ownership warnings:
Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/include/gnunet, /usr/lib/.build-id/4a, /usr/lib/.build-id/d6
Are the hidden directories needed?
g) Further warnings
libgnunet.aarch64: E: shlib-policy-excessive-dependency libm.so.6 gnunet-bcd.aarch64: W: package-with-huge-docs 93% gnunet.aarch64: E: non-executable-script /usr/bin/gnunet-transport-certificate-creation 644 /bin/sh gnunet.aarch64: W: non-executable-in-bin /usr/bin/gnunet-transport-certificate-creation 644 libgnunet.aarch64: E: missing-call-to-setgroups-before-setuid /usr/lib64/libgnunetutil.so.15.0.0
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org