Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Summary: Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: paul@xelerance.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities-20060622-2.fc9.src.rpm Description: This package contains the utilities for user-mode linux for networking, COW, etc.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |itamar@ispbrasil.com.br
--- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2008-11-01 11:10:28 EDT --- - Source: - Please use 'Source0: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%%7Bname%7D/%%7Bname%7D-%%7Bversion%7D.tar....' instead of a link to a mirror https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #2 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2008-11-01 11:18:04 EDT --- what`s the lasted version ?
http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/uml_utilities_20070815.tar.bz2 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade/
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #3 from Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com 2008-11-01 12:22:52 EDT --- Thanks for the pointers. The download sites are a complete mess. I hadn't even noticed there was a newer version until you pointed it out. It is only directly linked and not accessable via the sf.net downloads pages.
Spec URL: ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities-20070815-1.fc9.src.rpm
* Sat Nov 1 2008 Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com - 20070815-1 - Was pointed to newer version of source at obscured location - Hack out hardcoded stripping of binaries - -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 no longer needed
rpmlint output: uml_utilities.src:19: W: setup-not-quiet uml_utilities.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/uml_net root 04755 uml_utilities.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/uml_net 04755 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings.
I am not sure why setup is not quiet, since all it contains is: %setup -n tools-%{ver}
which only untars the source without an error.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #4 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2008-11-01 14:34:07 EDT --- try
%setup -q -n tools-%{ver}
the Source0 is very strange, looks like jdike and blaisorblade is not using sourceforge to host files, the best options is ask where are located the lasted version and what's the right address for downloading it.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #5 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2008-11-01 14:50:53 EDT --- what's the difference between
this:
mylib=`echo %{_libdir} | sed "s//usr//"` ln -s ..$mylib/uml/port-helper $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/port-helper
and this :
ln -s %{_libdir}/uml/port-helper $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/port-helper
?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #6 from Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com 2008-11-02 16:49:15 EDT --- Re: #4: I'm now using the link that's most prominently linked as the "download it here" link. I also added -q, which indeed resolved the warning.
Re: #5: The difference is that I'm making a relative softlink, instead of an absolute one. eg a link to ../lib instead of /usr/lib
Spec URL: ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities-20070815-2.fc9.src.rpm
* Sun Nov 2 2008 Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com - 20070815-2 - Added -q to setup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #7 from Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com 2008-11-09 23:29:59 EDT --- Anyone wants to pick up the review?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Till Maas opensource@till.name changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |opensource@till.name Status Whiteboard| |NotReady Flag| |needinfo?(paul@xelerance.co | |m)
--- Comment #8 from Till Maas opensource@till.name 2008-12-10 16:13:02 EDT --- - RPM_OPT_FLAGS are not honoured: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags E.g.:
cc -g -Wall -DTUNTAP -c -o ethertap.o ethertap.c
- It does not build here, the Makefile of humsify contains:
install -o 0755 $(BIN) $(DESTDIR)$(BIN_DIR)
The "-o 0755" should probably be "-m 0755", which then can be omitted, because it is the default mode used by install.
Please make sure that the package builds before submitting it for review. You can use:
koji build --scratch dist-f11 *.src.rpm
To create a scratch build of the package on koji to verify that it builds.
Please remove the "NotReady" from the Whiteboard once you submitted a SRPM that does at least build.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|needinfo?(paul@xelerance.co | |m) |
--- Comment #9 from Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com 2009-01-17 17:53:46 EDT --- I'll check the things you mentioned. And of course, it built fine for me. I'm using my own package on our dev servers :P
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #10 from Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de 2009-02-15 15:06:21 EDT --- Based on Pauls work I've created an updated package which addresses all mentioned issues:
- build problem - RPM_OPT_FLAGS not honored
Spec URL: http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~tiwi/uml_utilities-20070815-3.fc10.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~tiwi/uml_utilities.spec
The package builds successfully in F10 and F11 on the 4 default architectures: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1128542 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1128537
I'm looking forward to the next review cycle. It would be great if the package could be included into Fedora soon.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status Whiteboard|NotReady |
--- Comment #11 from Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com 2009-02-17 14:28:27 EDT --- I confirmed the package still works for me on x86_64. rpmlint is still fairly quiet: uml_utilities.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/uml_net root 04755 uml_utilities.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/uml_net 04755 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
Thanks for your work Christian! Let's hope we can get this into Fedora soon!
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #12 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-02-17 15:50:39 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11)
I confirmed the package still works for me on x86_64. rpmlint is still fairly quiet: uml_utilities.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/uml_net root 04755 uml_utilities.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/uml_net 04755 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.
Thanks for your work Christian! Let's hope we can get this into Fedora soon!
uml_net requires suid bit to work , so there erros can be ignored.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |tcallawa@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |tcallawa@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #13 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2009-02-27 10:35:33 EDT --- %define ver 20070815
Please don't do this. Just put that in Version: and use %{version}. It will simplify the spec.
Also, the license tag is wrong. All of the code simply says "GPL", so the tag should be : License: GPL+
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ#How_do_I_figure_out_what_version...
Also, it looks like the Source0 url is wrong, it should be:
http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/%%7Bname%7D_%%7Bversion%7D.tar.bz2
And... ncurses-devel is a Requires of readline-devel, so you shouldn't need to BuildRequires it.
Aside from that, everything looks fine. I'll finish the review, but please show me a finished package before I can flip the approved flag.
== Review == Good:
- rpmlint checks return: uml_utilities.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/uml_net root 04755 uml_utilities.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/uml_net 04755 Safe to ignore. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (GPL+) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream (4e10de8e0f5bf681fa295572009518b77fd8a1dd) - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #14 from Christian Krause chkr@plauener.de 2009-02-27 16:04:50 EDT --- Thanks for the review!
(In reply to comment #13)
Please don't do this. Just put that in Version: and use %{version}. It will simplify the spec.
Fixed.
Also, the license tag is wrong. All of the code simply says "GPL", so the tag should be : License: GPL+
Fixed.
Also, it looks like the Source0 url is wrong, it should be: http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/%%7Bname%7D_%%7Bversion%7D.tar.bz2
Fixed, spectool -g SPECS/uml_utilities.spec works fine now, sha1sum: 4e10de8e0f5bf681fa295572009518b77fd8a1dd
And... ncurses-devel is a Requires of readline-devel, so you shouldn't need to BuildRequires it.
Fixed. Package builds fine locally using mock and for F10 and F11:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1206294 https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1206307
Aside from that, everything looks fine. I'll finish the review, but please show me a finished package before I can flip the approved flag.
I've uploaded the new packages:
Spec URL: http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~tiwi/uml_utilities-20070815-4.fc10.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://www-user.tu-chemnitz.de/~tiwi/uml_utilities.spec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #15 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2009-02-27 16:10:10 EDT --- Looks good, APPROVED.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #16 from Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com 2009-02-27 16:14:05 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: uml_utilities Short Description: Utilities for user-mode linux kernel Owners: pwouters Branches: EL-5, F-9, F-10 InitialCC:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #17 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-02-28 19:08:23 EDT --- cvs done.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-03-01 16:45:05 EDT --- uml_utilities-20070815-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/uml_utilities-20070815-4.fc10
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-03-01 16:54:55 EDT --- uml_utilities-20070815-4.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/uml_utilities-20070815-4.fc9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RELEASE_PENDING
--- Comment #20 from Paul Wouters paul@xelerance.com 2009-03-01 18:31:18 EDT --- Thanks everyone. Packages build
Except for EL-5, as it seems fuse is not enabled for EL-5 (though the package exists in EL-5, apparently there is no kernel support and therefor userland is not build, and our build fails with a missing fuse-devel dependancy)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-03-04 11:25:56 EDT --- uml_utilities-20070815-4.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RELEASE_PENDING |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |20070815-4.fc10 Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-03-06 16:52:54 EDT --- uml_utilities-20070815-5.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/uml_utilities-20070815-5.fc9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-02 13:20:09 EDT --- uml_utilities-20070815-5.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|20070815-4.fc10 |20070815-5.fc9
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org