Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463
Summary: Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ming.zym@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/trafficserver.spec SRPM URL: http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/trafficserver-2.1.6-1.src.rpm Description: Apache Traffic Server is fast, scalable and extensible HTTP/1.1 compliant caching proxy server. Formerly a commercial product, Yahoo! donated it to the Apache Foundation, and is now an Apache TLP. site: http://trafficserver.apache.org/ version 2.1.6 is the most stable+useable release.
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=683463
Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- URL| |http://trafficserver.apache | |.org/
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=683463
Ed Marshall esm+redhat@logic.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |esm+redhat@logic.net
--- Comment #1 from Ed Marshall esm+redhat@logic.net 2011-03-09 11:54:12 EST --- Hi, this is a completely unofficial review, but I'd actually like to see trafficserver in Fedora. :)
The first thing I noticed: you're packaging the unstable version of trafficserver (2.1.6) rather than the stable release from September (2.0.1). Upstream doesn't seem to have confidence that 2.1.6 is ready to be declared stable yet; should Fedora be overriding them?
rpmlint on the SRPM reports a few errors:
trafficserver.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C TrafficServer trafficserver.src: E: description-line-too-long C Apache Traffic Server is fast, scalable and extensible HTTP/1.1 compliant caching proxy server. trafficserver.src: E: description-line-too-long C Formerly a commercial product, Yahoo! donated it to the Apache Foundation, and is now an Apache TLP. trafficserver.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog trafficserver.src: W: invalid-license Apache-2.0 trafficserver.src:11: W: hardcoded-packager-tag Zhao trafficserver.src:30: W: rpm-buildroot-usage %build echo $RPM_BUILD_ROOT trafficserver.src:52: W: macro-in-comment %attr trafficserver.src:17: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 17, tab: line 3)
So, some simple changes I'd suggest to make it happier:
- Make the summary more descriptive; Name: tells us what it is, Summary: tells us what it does (and Description: expands on that). See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Summary_and_description
- Wrap the description field at 80 characters or less. Again, think about what the package does, rather than it's history.
- Add the applicable package versions to the changelog "*" lines. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs
- Change license field to "ASL 2.0". See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Documentation_Licenses
- Remove the Packager: tag. (We get credit in the changelog. :) See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Rpmlint_Errors
- Take out the "echo $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" from the spec; this looks like debugging leftovers?
- Line 17 of the spec has tabs instead of spaces.
rpmlint on the binary you built brings up a few more issues (I've trimmed out the repeats):
trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-documentation trafficserver.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/lib64/trafficserver/plugins 0644L trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/ts/ts.h trafficserver.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/lib64/trafficserver 0644L trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/ts/experimental.h trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsmgmt.so trafficserver.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/include/ts 0644L trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsutil.so trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsutil.a trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsmgmt.a trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/ts/mgmtapi.h trafficserver.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/ts/remap.h trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_shell trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tsxs trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-postin /etc/init.d/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-preun /etc/init.d/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: E: no-chkconfig-line /etc/init.d/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: E: subsys-not-used /etc/init.d/trafficserver
There's quite a bit here, but the basics are:
- no man pages or documentation; you'll really want to work out the conflicts with the man pages, and I'd suggest adding a %doc section for the README and other documentation files in the distribution.
- file and directory permissions need a bit of cleaning up; specifically, "%defattr(-,root,root,-)" is probably more appropriate. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Owners...
- devel files need to be broken out into a separate -devel package; see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Devel_Packages
- you'll want to add a logrotate configuration; see "httpd" as a good example.
- init scripts should be enabled and disabled via postin/preun scripts via chkconfig. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Scriptlets
Getting into build issues, I tried building the package with mock, and it failed:
libtool: install: /usr/bin/install -c .libs/traffic_sac /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/trafficserver-2.1.6-1.i386/usr/bin/traffic_sac /usr/bin/install -c -d -o nobody -g nobody /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/trafficserver-2.1.6-1.i386/usr/lib/trafficserver/plugins /usr/bin/install: cannot change owner and permissions of `/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/trafficserver-2.1.6-1.i386/usr/lib/trafficserver/plugins': Operation not permitted make[3]: *** [install-exec-local] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/trafficserver-2.1.6-unstable/proxy' make[2]: *** [install-am] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/trafficserver-2.1.6-unstable/proxy' make[1]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/trafficserver-2.1.6-unstable/proxy' make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1
That should give you a start on things that will need to be done; mainly, I'd try to get to the point where rpmlint isn't complaining about anything (or you understand why it's complaining), and it builds smoothly in mock. You might want to read over http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines for a list of some of things a more official review will end up looking at.
Hope this helps!
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=683463
--- Comment #2 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-03-11 07:36:22 EST --- yeah, thanks for points out so many issues, I have put up my modified rpm in the same location (same name)：
cutdown rpmlint reporting to 3warning: [root@ts1 SPECS]# rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-2.1.6-1.x86_64.rpm trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. [root@ts1 SPECS]# rpmlint ../SRPMS/trafficserver-2.1.6-1.src.rpm trafficserver.src:34: W: rpm-buildroot-usage %build echo $RPM_BUILD_ROOT trafficserver.src:51: E: use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR trafficserver.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 18, tab: line 3) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings. [root@ts1 SPECS]# rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-devel-2.1.6-1.x86_64.rpm trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [root@ts1 SPECS]# my comment: hidden-file is really the trafficserver config logrotating, trafficserver do strict log rotating and very carefull of the disk usage, that is by design. service-default-enabled, not started in any runlevel by default se-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR, how to avoid this error? I have no idea, as httpd is doing the same too.
- why 2.1.6 unstable but not 2.0.1 stable? from my point, we should use v2.1.6 other than v2.0.1, we are more confidence in v2.1.6 indeed. it will be the pre release of v3.0.
- Take out the "echo $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" from the spec; this looks like debugging leftovers? that is because of our unstable release suffix in package name, may be removed in V3.0 stable.
It will need some more work on tracking all requirement in official ReviewGuidelines, just put a update and we are working on 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=683463
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status Whiteboard| |BuildFails
--- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2011-03-12 21:32:16 EST --- I happened to look at this package at random.
Please remember to increase release and generate a new RPM whenever you make changes. I do not know which version of the package I happened to download. However, it did not build for me in mock (x86_64, rawhide):
CoreUtils.cc: In static member function 'static void CoreUtils::find_stuff(StuffTest_f)': CoreUtils.cc:546:258: error: 'coress.core_stack_state::pc' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=uninitialized] CoreUtils.cc:546:258: error: 'coress.core_stack_state::framep' may be used uninitialized in this function [-Werror=uninitialized]
Perhaps you could try a koji scratch build to verify that your package builds OK.
Please clear the whiteboard if providing a package which builds.
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=683463
--- Comment #4 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-03-13 01:14:16 EST --- that is a new bug? I haven't tested on recently FC release, the recent RHEL 5 release works for me.
issue confirmed, I have tested on my rawhide testing box too. have open the bug for upstream: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TS-705
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=683463
Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status Whiteboard|BuildFails |
--- Comment #5 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-03-19 12:59:51 EDT --- I have update to 2.1.6-2, which fixed the building issue and other Fedora tweak. http://yum.zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/2.1.6-2/
passed x86_64 native building and i386 mock building.
and here is the rpmlint information [root@unknown-10-62-163-x SPECS]# rpmlint /root/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-devel-2.1.6-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm trafficserver-devel.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tsxs 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. [root@unknown-10-62-163-x SPECS]# rpmlint /root/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-2.1.6-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm trafficserver.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_shell trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/plugins/conf_remap.so trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsmgmt.so.2.1.6 trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsutil.so.2.1.6 trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_shell trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 22 warnings.
things I am still tracking: 1, static libary, the -devel package have .la file, from the Guideline that is not a good way, I am still investing how to avoid it with upstream.
2, extra platform testing, may need to find out others.
for things that will take into action: 1, v2.1.7 will be released out next Monday, I will catch it up. 2, most patch for Fedora tweak is not in upstream trunk, will push it after we have done the most reviews.
thanks
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=683463
--- Comment #6 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-03-22 12:42:54 EDT --- Bump to v2.1.7, uploaded in http://yum.zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/2.1.7-1/
http://yum.zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/2.1.7-1/trafficserver.spec http://yum.zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/2.1.7-1/trafficserver-2.1.7-1.fc16... http://yum.zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/2.1.7-1/trafficserver-2.1.7-1.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=683463
--- Comment #7 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-06-15 04:29:25 EDT --- Bumped to new stable release 3.0.0, uploaded in http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-2/
http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-2/trafficserver-3.0.0-2.fc16.src... http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-2/trafficserver-3.0.0-2.fc16.x86... http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-2/trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-2.fc...
and here is the rpmlint output:
[root@unknown-10-62-163-x SPECS]# rpmlint /root/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-3.0.0-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm trafficserver.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_shell trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsutil.so.3.0.0 trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsmgmt.so.3.0.0 trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/plugins/conf_remap.so trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_shell trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 23 warnings. [root@unknown-10-62-163-x SPECS]# rpmlint /root/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-2.fc16.x86_64.rpm trafficserver-devel.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tsxs 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. [root@unknown-10-62-163-x SPECS]# ls distcache.spec trafficserver-3.0.0.spec trafficserver.spec [root@unknown-10-62-163-x SPECS]# rpmlint /root/rpmbuild/SRPMS/trafficserver-3.0.0-2.fc16.src.rpm trafficserver.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver.src:34: W: macro-in-comment %patch9 trafficserver.src:35: W: macro-in-comment %patch10 trafficserver.src:36: W: macro-in-comment %patch1001 trafficserver.src:47: W: macro-in-comment %find_lang trafficserver.src:47: W: macro-in-comment %{name} trafficserver.src:68: W: macro-in-comment %attr 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. [root@unknown-10-62-163-x SPECS]#
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=683463
--- Comment #8 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-15 06:31:57 EDT ---
I'm interested in this for RHEL6/EPEL6, so that's were I'm testing now.
Can't you just delete all the noise from the specfile:
-# we need to deal with the -unstable suffix: -#Patch9: trafficserver-fix-wccp-support.patch -#Patch10: trafficserver_wccp_virtual_destructor.patch -#Patch1001: trafficserver_ssdtier.patch -#%patch9 -p1 -b .patch9 -#%patch10 -p1 -b .patch10 -#%patch1001 -p1 -b .patch1001 -#%find_lang %{name} -# man pages conflicts with man-pages-zh_CN-1.5 -#%attr(0644, root, root) /usr/share/man/man1/*
[janfrode@RHEL6 SPECS]$ rpmlint trafficserver.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
I'm not seeing the unstripped-binary warnings on RHEL6, so there it's looking quite good:
$ rpmlint /home/janfrode/rpmbuild/SRPMS/trafficserver-3.0.0-2.oc3.src.rpm trafficserver.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/janfrode/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-3.0.0-2.oc3.x86_64.rpm trafficserver.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 3.0.0-2 ['3.0.0-2.oc3', '3.0.0-2.oc3'] trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/janfrode/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-debuginfo-3.0.0-2.oc3.x86_64.rpm trafficserver-debuginfo.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/janfrode/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-2.oc3.x86_64.rpm trafficserver-devel.x86_64: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 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=683463
--- Comment #9 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-15 07:01:24 EDT --- To fix the man-page conflict, maybe you can just exclude the 2-3 generically named man-pages, and keep the rest ?
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1 cp doc/man/*.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/ rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/enable.1 rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/disable.1 rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/exit.1
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=683463
--- Comment #10 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-15 07:26:33 EDT --- It was suggested on #epel to rather rename these conflicting man-pages, and leave a not about it in README.fedora:
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1 cp doc/man/*.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/ mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/enable.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/ts-enable.1 mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/disable.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/ts-disable.1 mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/exit.1 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/share/man/man1/ts-exit.1 cat <<EOF > README.fedora The man-pages for enable, disable and exit was renamed to ts-enable, ts-disable and ts-exit to avoid conflicts with other man-pages. EOF
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=683463
--- Comment #11 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-06-16 03:41:45 EDT --- http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-3/
http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-3/trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.src... http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-3/trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.x86... http://zymlinux.net/trafficserver/rpm/3.0.0-3/trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-3.fc...
updates the man-pages and cleanup spec file, thanks Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net
[root@unknown-10-62-163-x rpmbuild]# rpmlint SRPMS/trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.src.rpm RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-3.fc16.x86_64.rpm RPMS/x86_64/trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.x86_64.rpm trafficserver.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tsxs trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/plugins/conf_remap.so trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_shell trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsutil.so.3.0.0 trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/trafficserver/libtsmgmt.so.3.0.0 trafficserver.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/bin/traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/config_clock.1.gz 53: warning: macro `..' not defined trafficserver.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/config_logging.1.gz 89: warning: macro `SS"custom' not defined (possibly missing space after `SS') trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 26 warnings. [root@unknown-10-62-163-x rpmbuild]#
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=683463
--- Comment #12 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-06-17 06:14:06 EDT --- can someone give me some review and tell me what I need to do on this?
we have aready put TS on FreeBSD ports, I don't want Linux to be too slow
thanks guys.
and here is the mock testing:
[zym@unknown-10-62-163-x root]$ mock --rebuild rpmbuild/SRPMS/trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.src.rpm INFO: mock.py version 1.1.10 starting... State Changed: init plugins INFO: selinux disabled State Changed: start INFO: Start(rpmbuild/SRPMS/trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.src.rpm) Config(fedora-rawhide-x86_64) State Changed: lock buildroot State Changed: clean INFO: chroot (/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64) unlocked and deleted State Changed: unlock buildroot State Changed: init State Changed: lock buildroot Mock Version: 1.1.10 INFO: Mock Version: 1.1.10 INFO: enabled root cache INFO: root cache aged out! cache will be rebuilt INFO: enabled yum cache State Changed: cleaning yum metadata INFO: enabled ccache State Changed: running yum State Changed: creating cache State Changed: unlock buildroot State Changed: setup State Changed: build INFO: Done(rpmbuild/SRPMS/trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.src.rpm) Config(default) 11 minutes 45 seconds INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result State Changed: end [zym@unknown-10-62-163-x root]$ ls /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result build.log trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.src.rpm trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-3.fc16.x86_64.rpm root.log trafficserver-3.0.0-3.fc16.x86_64.rpm state.log trafficserver-debuginfo-3.0.0-3.fc16.x86_64.rpm [zym@unknown-10-62-163-x root]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/*.rpm trafficserver.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/config_clock.1.gz 53: warning: macro `..' not defined trafficserver.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/config_logging.1.gz 89: warning: macro `SS"custom' not defined (possibly missing space after `SS') trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_server trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_manager trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_line trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_sac trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_cop trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logstats trafficserver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary traffic_logcat trafficserver.x86_64: W: one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary tsxs 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 15 warnings. [zym@unknown-10-62-163-x root]$
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=683463
--- Comment #13 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-17 06:37:38 EDT ---
Only thing I find strange currently is that you install the daemon binaries to /usr/bin instead of /usr/sbin/. Is that intentional ? Hmm.. I see the Gentoo layout used has defined "sbindir: ${exec_prefix}/sbin" -- so it's strange it's not putting anything there.
Also, it would probably be nice to restart ts on upgrades in %postun:
if [ $1 -eq 1 ] ; then /sbin/service trafficserver condrestart &>/dev/null || : fi
I think it's starting to look quite good, and I think it would be great to get it into the package db as soon as possible to ease builds and also get more testers. Unfortunately I'm just an EPEL packager, don't know if my reviews counts for anything.
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=683463
Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dwalsh@redhat.com
--- Comment #14 from Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com 2011-06-17 08:58:29 EDT --- What is /etc/trafficserver/*
Are these config files? I am trying to write some SELinux policy and I see traffic_manager modifying content in this directory
/etc/trafficserver/log_hosts.config_2
Any reason these files are not in /var/lib/trafficserver?
/etc should be treated as readonly.
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=683463
--- Comment #15 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-17 09:20:24 EDT --- Yes, /etc/trafficserver/* are configfiles, but I believe they can be modified by the traffic_manager (or traffic_server?), so it might be good to make it an selinux optional if one wants to allow this.
Every time the configfiles are changed, the old version is rewritten to name.config_number+1.
The traffic_manager is also a cluster manager, so config changes on one server can automatically be replicated to the other servers.
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=683463
--- Comment #16 from Daniel Walsh dwalsh@redhat.com 2011-06-17 13:46:34 EDT --- So all files in /etc/trafficserver can be modified by the traffic_manager?
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=683463
--- Comment #17 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-17 16:14:57 EDT --- dwalsh: I replied on the users@trafficserver mailinglist. Hopefull the developers there are following the discussion and can chime in with more knowledge.
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=683463
--- Comment #18 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-06-18 05:55:43 EDT --- dwalsh: yes, all files in /etc/trafficserver should be modified by traffic_manager. I am a trafficserver devel, that is why I request this pkg :D Trafficserver is a property enterprise grade system before opensource, and the config management is one of the most powerful designs: 1, ts will backup each version of the config file, with a _XXX suffix, the default is set to keep 3 versions for each file 2, ts config file can be changed by many ways: 2.1, edit directly(or by any means for common config management) 2.2, changed by traffic_manager, triggered by commands such as traffic_line and traffic_shell 2.3, changed by the Cluster management, with broadcast like protocol. 2.4, changed by other config management function, such as config upload/rollback etc. 2.5, the remote config management interface, port 8083
there are problems when we deal with trafficserver and the modern operation systems: 1, for security reason, traffics_manager process will drop root privileges to nobody. and the configs is located in /etc/trafficserver, but it must be set to nobody writable. this is a problem that we still have no idea how to fix in the following release, maybe the config system will be changed to something like config database etc. 2, many config files in /etc/trafficserver can be override by configs(ie: most files can be refined in records.config) and environment variables, the config may be lose the meaning. in the opensource release, we have dropped the most config environment variables, and even command options etc, we make the release file directory a httpd like layout, that is Gentoo layout for. and most config options in records.config is a hiden options. that will prevent most confusion for common users. that is the most things we have done to make it much easy for users to manage the big ship( you can config 500 options in the records.config file for now, after we have removed many functions in the past 2 years ).
for now, I don't think we have a quick solution to get all things settle. so I'd suggest we take it and give the devel team to get it improved. these cool features is very useful for ISP grade CDN operations, we'd like not get it removed blindly.
hopes the information not miss-leading many thanks for you help!
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=683463
--- Comment #19 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-18 10:38:22 EDT --- Zhao:
I would suggest you change ATS to use a dedicated user/group, instead of "nobody". Having configfiles owned by "nobody" could mean that other nobodies can change them, which sounds bad....
So,
./configure --enable-layout=Gentoo --libdir=%{_libdir}/trafficserver --with-tcl=%{_libdir} --with-user traffic --with-group traffic
and in %pre:
getent group traffic >/dev/null || groupadd -r traffic getent passwd traffic >/dev/null || useradd -r -g traffic -d / -s /sbin/nologin -c "Apache Traffic Server" traffic
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=683463
--- Comment #20 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-06-22 04:25:51 EDT --- Jan-Frode:
thanks for you help on owner this RPM.
from the IRC, devel team prefer the user ats:ats. and we need a dedicated uid/gid, as we will have a cluster env, when we don't want to make things mess if id changes.
thanks
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=683463
--- Comment #21 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-22 07:48:31 EDT --- I requested static numbers in #715266.
Zhao: Could you please create a FAS account so that we can try to find a fedora packaging sponsor for you?
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=683463
--- Comment #22 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-23 04:27:59 EDT --- Thanks for letting me take over this Zhao. I've created a webpage (inspired by your fancy pages) at http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/ to continue this. Will now look for someone to review the package for me.
The changes in v3.0.0-4 is to add the dedicated ats/ats user/group, and do a conditional restart on upgrades.
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=683463
--- Comment #23 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-27 02:37:04 EDT --- http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-4/trafficserver-3.0.0-4.el6.src.rpm http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-4/trafficserver.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=683463
Mark Chappell tremble@tremble.org.uk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tremble@tremble.org.uk
--- Comment #24 from Mark Chappell tremble@tremble.org.uk 2011-06-27 03:12:54 EDT --- Issues:
* Rpmlint
rpmlint SPECS/trafficserver.spec SPECS/trafficserver.spec:93: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 93, tab: line 3) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
* Odd macro - not needed.
%define version 3.0.0
* Please consider renaming the patches, so they at least all contain trafficserver-
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=683463
--- Comment #25 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-27 03:33:01 EDT --- Thanks, fixed these in v3.0.0-5:
http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver.spec http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-3.0.0-5.el6.src.rpm
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=683463
--- Comment #26 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-27 03:52:44 EDT --- BTW: I also have builds for RHEL6/x86_64 at:
http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-3.0.0-5.el6.x86_64.rpm http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-debuginfo-3.0.0-5.el6.... http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-5.el6.x86_...
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=683463
Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |metherid@gmail.com
--- Comment #27 from Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:33:07 EDT ---
No need to define buildroot anymore unless you are branching for EPEL 5 as well
BuildRoot: %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}-root
Patches should have a comment indicating upstream status
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PatchUpstreamStatus
I would prefer you use systemd native service file for Rawhide.
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=683463
--- Comment #28 from Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:35:10 EDT --- Can remove the following as well for Fedora spec unless you want to keep the same spec for EPEL as well
%clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#.25clean
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=683463
--- Comment #29 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-27 15:54:32 EDT --- Rahul: thanks for the comments! I do intend to use this specfile for EPEL also, and possibly all the way back to EPEL5 -- so I'll just leave a note in the specfile for now to indicate these should be removed or ifdef'ed out for newer EPEL/Fedoras.
Regarding the upstream status of the patches, I will check ASAP.
And providing systemd native service file sounds like a good idea, but I would prefer to finish this for EPEL initially before starting working on rawhide/fedora.
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=683463
--- Comment #30 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-06-27 23:18:23 EDT --- comment on the patches: Patch2: trafficserver-init_scripts.patch this patch is for systemd and rhel5.x style fixing, it is not intend to submit to upstream for now. we may submit it after we have it stable after all.
Patch7: trafficserver_make_install.patch this patch is for mock building, fixing make install to run in unprivileged mock account, I think that is not a common case, it should not be passed to upstream.
Patch51: trafficserver-cluster_interface_linux.patch the problem this patch want to fix, is fixed in TS-845, the trunk. this patch is quick fix for linux, we can live with it.
FYI
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=683463
--- Comment #31 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-29 16:01:41 EDT --- uid:gid 176:176 has been reserved for ats in setup-2.8.35-1.fc16/rawhide, ref: bz#715266.
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=683463
Mark Chappell tremble@tremble.org.uk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |tremble@tremble.org.uk Alias| |trafficserver
--- Comment #32 from Mark Chappell tremble@tremble.org.uk 2011-06-30 14:32:33 EDT --- - = N/A / = Check ! = Problem ? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS === [/] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [/] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [/] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Language specific items [/] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. Tested: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3169610 [!] Rpmlint output: (snipping the things to ignore)
$ rpmlint *.rpm trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US apache -> Apache, apace
[/] Package is not relocatable. [!] Buildroot is correct ( Not needed if >= EL6 and >= F13 ) [/] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [/] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: ASL 2.0 [!] 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. [!] With any Subpackage installed the license must also be installed (this may belong to another subpackage) [/] Spec file is legible and written in American English. [/] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL.
$ md5sum trafficserver-3.0.0.tar.bz2 SOURCES/trafficserver-3.0.0.tar.bz2 343661b10a0d8425180438ae43af7b4d trafficserver-3.0.0.tar.bz2 343661b10a0d8425180438ae43af7b4d SOURCES/trafficserver-3.0.0.tar.bz2
[/] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch [/] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [/] The spec file handles locales properly. [/] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required. [/] Package must own all directories that it creates. [/] Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [/] Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [/] Permissions on files are set properly. [/] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. ( Not needed if >= EL6 and >= F13 ) [/] Package consistently uses macros. [/] Package contains code, or permissible content. [-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required. [/] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [/] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [!] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present. [-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present. [/] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. [/] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. [!] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la). [-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI application. [/] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS === [/] Latest version is packaged. [/] 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. [/] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Tested through koji [/] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. Tested on: fedora-rawhide [-] Package functions as described. [/] Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct. [-] File based requires are sane. [-] %check is present and the tests pass
=== COMMENTS ===
* Buildroot: (You're building for EPEL 5) Should be %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX)
* You should be including the LICENSE file.
* Static Libraries You appear to be shipping static libraries in your devel subpackage. static libraries are frowned upon unless you have a very good reason, and if you need them they should be in a separate -static subpackage
* Libtool Archives present Please don't include the .la files, just delete them.
* Hidden files... Does this need to be there ? trafficserver.x86_64: W: hidden-file-or-dir /etc/trafficserver/body_factory/default/.body_factory_info
* Spelling mistakes trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging trafficserver-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US apache -> Apache, apace
* No logrotate config - please include one trafficserver.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/trafficserver
* It's not always considered advisable to start the service by default once the package has been installed trafficserver.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/trafficserver
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=683463
Mark Chappell tremble@tremble.org.uk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |fedora-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=683463
--- Comment #33 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-06-30 16:29:41 EDT --- Addressing your comments in reverse order:
* I don't understand why rpmlint claims it's starting the service by default. Please check the initscript at http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-6/trafficserver.init for what's installed. Both the chkconfig and INIT INFO looks disabled by default to me.
* The traffic server has it's internal mechanism for log rotation, so logrotate isn't appropriate.
* Spelling mistakes fixed.
* Hidden files -- yes, these should be there. Ref: http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-6/body_factory.README
* Removed .la.
* Removed static libs, and left comment about these needing to go to -static if we want to include them at some later point.
* Set your suggested buildroot.
Updated specfile at http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-6/trafficserver.spec Updated srpm: http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-6/trafficserver-3.0.0-6.el6.src.rpm
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=683463
--- Comment #34 from Zhao Yongming ming.zym@gmail.com 2011-07-15 04:06:04 EDT --- the bugfixing stable release v3.0.1 will be released in days, can we get the review process done at the time of next release?
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=683463
--- Comment #35 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-07-19 03:10:34 EDT --- Updated to v3.0.1:
http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.1-0/trafficserver.spec http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.1-0/trafficserver-3.0.1-0.el6.src.rpm
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=683463
Bill McGonigle bill-bugzilla.redhat.com@bfccomputing.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bill-bugzilla.redhat.com@bf | |ccomputing.com
--- Comment #36 from Bill McGonigle bill-bugzilla.redhat.com@bfccomputing.com 2011-10-28 01:04:20 EDT --- I'm new to trafficserver - figured I'd start with this (on el6). Thanks for packaging!
A few notes:
1) I built this SRPM on a machine called 'admin', copied the RPM over to a machine called 'traffic', and when I installed the RPM, records.config had:
CONFIG proxy.config.proxy_name STRING admin.bfccomputing.com
It would be cool if a scriptlet could handle this automatically on install, but failing that the buildhost shouldn't be included in the RPM's default config file.
2) Also would be nice is a 'reload' option in the init script. I think 'traffic_line -x' does this.
3) Perhaps Redhat-ify config options, such as:
CONFIG proxy.config.ssl.server.cert.path STRING /etc/pki/tls/certs CONFIG proxy.config.ssl.server.private_key.path STRING /etc/pki/tls/private
That's all for now - I have a functional reverse proxy that seems to be working quite well!
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=683463
--- Comment #37 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-10-28 04:25:10 EDT ---
Thanks for the feedback Bill! I'll look into implementing your suggestions.
Tremble: any hope on progress on this 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=683463
--- Comment #38 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2011-12-08 03:41:37 EST --- Updated to upstream release v3.0.2. Also added a small patch to correct condrestart() in initscript (fixed in v3.1).
http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.2-0/trafficserver.spec http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.2-0/trafficserver-3.0.2-0.el6.src.rpm
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=683463
Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Component|Package Review |Package Review Version|rawhide |el6 AssignedTo|tremble@tremble.org.uk |nobody@fedoraproject.org Product|Fedora |Fedora EPEL
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=683463
Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW
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=683463
Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE Last Closed| |2012-02-02 17:34:21
--- Comment #39 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfrode@tanso.net 2012-02-02 17:34:21 EST ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 787020 ***
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla