[Bug 919689] New: Review Request: nodejs-jshashes - A fast and independent hashing library for Node.js
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
Bug ID: 919689 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-jshashes - A fast and independent hashing library for Node.js Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Reporter: tom@compton.nu
Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-jshashes.spec SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1-1.fc18.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: tomh
Description: jsHashes is a pure JavaScript implementation of the most extended hash algorithms. Its goal is to provide an independent, fast and easy solution for hash algorithms both for client-side and server-side JavaScript environments. The code is fully compatible with the ECMAScript language specification and was tested in all major browsers (client-side) and node.js (server-side).
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |914924
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jamielinux@fedoraproject.or | |g Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jamielinux@fedoraproject.or | |g Flags| |fedora-cvs?
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags| |fedora-review?
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
--- Comment #1 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- Package Review ==============
Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
Issues: =======
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Various wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding warnings.
===== MUST items =====
Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [?]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [-]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 51200 bytes in 15 files. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: 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 %doc. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [!]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [-]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Rpmlint ------- Checking: nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1-1.fc18.noarch.rpm nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/hmac.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/uppercase.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/custom.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/LICENSE nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/hexadecimal.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/benchmark.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/README.md nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/base64.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/node_modules/jshashes/bin/hashes.js /urs/bin/env nodejs-jshashes.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/node_modules/jshashes/bin/hashes.js 0644L /urs/bin/env 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 11 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint nodejs-jshashes nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US js -> dis, ks, j nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/hmac.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/uppercase.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/custom.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/LICENSE nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/hexadecimal.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/benchmark.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/README.md nodejs-jshashes.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1/examples/server/base64.js nodejs-jshashes.noarch: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/lib/node_modules/jshashes/bin/hashes.js /urs/bin/env nodejs-jshashes.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/node_modules/jshashes/bin/hashes.js 0644L /urs/bin/env 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 11 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires -------- nodejs-jshashes (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs(engine)
Provides -------- nodejs-jshashes: nodejs-jshashes npm(jshashes)
MD5-sum check ------------- http://registry.npmjs.org/jshashes/-/jshashes-1.0.1.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a576a675f2fb2d1eee665d9c408894cb7a12fc726c3210c032d0b4b9453d4e04 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a576a675f2fb2d1eee665d9c408894cb7a12fc726c3210c032d0b4b9453d4e04
Generated by fedora-review 0.4.0 (660ce56) last change: 2013-01-29 Buildroot used: fedora-18-x86_64 Command line :/bin/fedora-review --rpm-spec -n nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1-1.fc18.src.rpm
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
--- Comment #2 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- Fixed rpmlint warnings:
Spec URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-jshashes.spec SRPM URL: http://download.compton.nu/nodejs/nodejs-jshashes-1.0.1-2.fc18.src.rpm
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
--- Comment #3 from Jamie Nguyen jamielinux@fedoraproject.org --- Great.
I assume this needs an exception? Like a few other of the node packages going through review, it appears to be another case of forked/adapted code rather than "bundling".
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
--- Comment #4 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- I've opened https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/263 to request an exception.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|914924 |
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=919689
Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed| |2013-03-10 15:11:04
--- Comment #5 from Tom Hughes tom@compton.nu --- It transpires that this modules is not in fact needed for nodejs-oauth, and is unlikely to ever be needed on Fedora as node is built with openssl and hence has a builtin crypto module that can compute hashes.
So I am going to close this review request and the associated FPC ticket.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla