Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: aeolus-configserver - The Aeolus Audrey Config Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756179
Summary: Review Request: aeolus-configserver - The Aeolus Audrey Config Server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: JVLcek@RedHat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: ---
Spec URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/configserver/v1/aeolus-configserver.spec
SRPM URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/configserver/v1/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-2.fc1...
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3533656
rpmlint output:
% rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-2.fc15.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
The below repeated warnings are being addressed by BZ 754274 - Allocate an 'aeolus' username and groupname https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754274
% rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-2.fc15.noarch.rpm aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/aeolus-configserver aeolus ... (repeats omitted) ... 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.
Description:
I just finished packaging the Aeolus Audrey Config Server and I would appreciate a review.
The Aeolus Audrey Config Server facilitates the post-boot configuration of instances in a cloud.
The upstream URL is: https://github.com/aeolusproject/audrey
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=756179
Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |meyering@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |meyering@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-22 16:50:53 EST --- I'll do 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=756179
--- Comment #2 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-23 05:40:06 EST --- I'll be afk for a while soon, and probably won't be back before 4pm (10am your time), but here's some initial feedback:
I noticed that this code uses /tmp/audrey as a "STORAGE_DIR",
src/config.ru:storage_dir = ENV['STORAGE_DIR'] || '/tmp/audrey'
described as:
# Directory where aeolus-configserver stores the instance configrations
First, that's a typo: s/configrations/configurations/
More importantly, I don't see anything that guarantees /tmp/audrey has been created by us and that it isn't writable by others. Sounds risky to use a hard-coded name like that. What if someone else has already created 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=756179
--- Comment #3 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-23 08:50:41 EST --- (In reply to comment #2)
I'll be afk for a while soon, and probably won't be back before 4pm (10am your time), but here's some initial feedback:
I noticed that this code uses /tmp/audrey as a "STORAGE_DIR",
src/config.ru:storage_dir = ENV['STORAGE_DIR'] || '/tmp/audrey'described as:
# Directory where aeolus-configserver stores the instance configrations
First, that's a typo: s/configrations/configurations/
More importantly, I don't see anything that guarantees /tmp/audrey has been created by us and that it isn't writable by others. Sounds risky to use a hard-coded name like that. What if someone else has already created it?
Thank you for you feedback Jim.
I'll address these issue.
I also realized that I had commented out the rake under the %build in the spec while doing some development. I'll fix that too and post a new review.
Joe
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=756179
--- Comment #4 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-28 17:37:41 EST ---
Hello Jim,
Huge "Thank You" for all the help so far.
I have a question/issue I need help with.
After changing the spec file to use "install" in place of "cp" rpmlint produces errors for most of them. I believe some should be "cp"-ed and perhaps some should have the shebang added but I took a quick look at the .rb files delivered with Aeolus Conductor I don't see any with a shebang line.
What do you think is the best way to handle these?
Thank you! Joe
- - -
% rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-3.fc15.noarch.rpm | grep E aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/sysconfig/aeolus-configserver-proxy aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /etc/sysconfig/aeolus-configserver-proxy aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/lib/model/consumer.rb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/instance-config.rng aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/template.rng aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/deployable.rng aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/lib/config_handler.rb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/config.ru aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/lib/model.rb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/configure/puppet/modules/apache/manifests/init.pp aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/lib/model/base.rb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/logrotate.d/aeolus-configserver aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/config.in.ru aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/configure/puppet/modules/apache/templates/vhost.erb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/lib/application_helper.rb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/lib/model/deployable.rb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/sysconfig/aeolus-configserver aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /etc/sysconfig/aeolus-configserver aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/assembly.rng aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/configure/puppet/modules/apache/templates/vhost80.erb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/lib/model/instance.rb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/configure/puppet/modules/apache/templates/vhost443.erb aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/configure/puppet/modules/configserver/manifests/init.pp aeolus-configserver.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/aeolus-configserver/configserver.rb
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=756179
--- Comment #5 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-29 13:15:07 EST --- Thank you for the help and feedback Jim!
I believe I've address everything.
The latest versions of the important documents can be found here: Please note "/v2" not "/v1"
Spec URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/configserver/v2/aeolus-configserver.spec
SRPM URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/configserver/v2/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc1...
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3550759
rpmlint output:
% rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc15.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Again, The below repeated warnings are being addressed by BZ 754274 - Allocate an 'aeolus' username and groupname https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754274
% rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc15.noarch.rpm aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/aeolus-configserver aeolus ... (repeats omitted) ... 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.
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=756179
Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-29 15:33:01 EST --- You're good to go, Joe.
Here's the checklist:
From https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
MUST Items Items marked as MUST are things that the package (or reviewer) MUST do. If a package fails a MUST item, that is considered a blocker. No package with blockers can be approved on a review. Those items must be fixed before approval can be given.
ok MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.
$ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc16.noarch.rpm aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/instance-config.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/instance-config.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/template.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/template.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/deployable.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/deployable.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/run/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/run/aeolus-configserver aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/assembly.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema/assembly.rng aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema aeolus aeolus-configserver.noarch: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/aeolus-configserver/schema aeolus 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 16 warnings.
The above are all ok, since aeolus is now a registered UID and GID name.
ok MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines . ok MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. ok 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 . ok MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. ok 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.
Verified by downloading the tgz file and comparing with what was installed:
$ wget -O - \ http://joev.fedorapeople.org/configserver/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1.tgz \ | cmp - $(find ~/rpmbuild|grep 'configserv.*tgz') && echo ok ok
ok MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. NA 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. ok 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. NA 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. ok MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries. ok 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. ok 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. ok 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. ok 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). ok 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: Header files must be in a -devel package. ok MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. ok MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. ok MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} ok MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built. ok 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. ok 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.
SHOULD Items: Items marked as SHOULD are things that the package (or reviewer) SHOULD do, but is not required to do.
ok SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. NA SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. ok SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. NA SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. NO* SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. ok SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. ok SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. ok SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg. A reasonable exception is that the main pkg itself is a devel tool not installed in a user runtime, e.g. gcc or gdb. ok SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself. ok SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work with upstream to add them where they make sense.
[*] Joe walked me through an existing set-up.
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=756179
Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #7 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-30 10:21:31 EST --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: aeolus-configserver Short Description: The Aeolus Audrey Config Server Owners: joev Branches: f16 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=756179
--- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-11-30 11:09:24 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
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=756179
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
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=756179
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-30 16:44:38 EST --- aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc16
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=756179
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-12-03 21:41:59 EST --- aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository.
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=756179
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4 | |.fc16 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2011-12-13 16:54:03
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-12-13 16:54:03 EST --- aeolus-configserver-0.4.1-4.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla