Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: The Aeolus Audrey Startup Agent
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751564
Summary: Review Request: The Aeolus Audrey Startup Agent 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/audrey-agent/v1/aeolus-audrey-agent.spec
SRPM URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v1/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.3.1-6.fc1...
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3491043
rpmlint output: % rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.3.1-6.fc15.noarch.rpm aeolus-audrey-agent.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2 aeolus-audrey-agent.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary audrey 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
I believe the 1 rpmlint error may be erroneous as the dependency flagged has "lib" in the name and there are other python-XYZ requires not flagged.
The lack of a manual page for audrey is addressed by an descriptive usage message.
Description:
I just finished packaging the Aeolus Audrey Startup Agent and I would appreciate a review.
The Aeolus Audrey Startup Agent, a script which runs on a booting cloud instances to retrieve configuration data from the Aeolus Config Server.
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=751564
Thomas Spura tomspur@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tomspur@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura tomspur@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-06 06:24:45 EST --- Some quick comments: - Please use _bindir and not app_root. - python-argparse is not available anymore. The argparse module is part of plain python. - You have no defattr, so I'm assuming you want to build for Fedora only. Then you can also nuke of %clean and BuildRoot - Please use mkdir and cp directly like rm too to be consistent. - The first mkdir is not needed anyway, the second one creates all directories needed. - Where come the sources from? Please add a full link. - extra_release is not needed too. When you want to add an extra_release sometime in the future, just add a number there (or bump the relase). No need for "%global extra_release 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=751564
Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |meyering@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |meyering@redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-06 09:28:06 EST --- Hi Joe,
I'll review this. I haven't investigated the python-httplib2 thing yet, but wonder if it's complaining that there's an explicit dependency on an arch-dependent library, given that this is a "noarch" package.
Regarding the no-man-page warning, there's a nice help2man program that can automatically generate a man page from the output of ./PROG --help. It's worth doing, if only to save folks the hassle of running "man PROG" and finding no manual -- even if the manual has no more information than PROG --help. I'll look at adding Makefile rules to generate the man page for you (that's how the 100+ coreutils man pages are generated).
One nit in the above, in case it's also in the spec, "runs on a ... instances" -- either drop the "a" or drop the trailing "s" in "instances".
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=751564
--- Comment #3 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-06 10:51:51 EST --- Hi again,
I've begun looking at the .py file and my first attempt to elicit --help output failed. I ran ./audrey_startup.py --help as non-root from the source directory and got a stack trace followed by this:
IOError: [Errno 13] Permission denied: '/var/log/audrey.log'
It'd be nice (at least as long as there's no man page) if there were a --help option that would print the concise description and list brief option descriptions. Typically, --help prints output to stdout (not stderr) and exits successfully without doing anything else.
Looking through the source, I see there's a --pw=PASSWORD option. That means if one is specifying a password, it will be visible via "ps". It would be better to allow the password to be read from a file or from a TTY, so that it cannot easily be snooped.
In the sources I see mention of "unittest" support. Is there an easy way to run those unit tests?
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=751564
--- Comment #4 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-07 06:59:12 EST --- Joe, The sole rpmlint error, that "E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2", is indeed a false positive, per this: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-March/133955.html
As to why we still have to deal with such false positives 18 months later, my guess is that people are looking forward to python 3.0. There, ISTR python-httplib2 is renamed not to include "lib".
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=751564
Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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=751564
--- Comment #5 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-07 07:16:35 EST --- Joe,
Please use %{buildroot} consistently, rather than $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
BTW, is there an "upstream" repository or release tarball? So far I haven't found one.
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=751564
--- Comment #6 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-07 07:20:16 EST --- Actually, per the packaging guidelines, you may use either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, as long as you do so consistently.
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=751564
--- Comment #7 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-07 12:35:27 EST --- Joe gave me this upstream URL 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=751564
--- Comment #8 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-07 13:40:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #1)
Some quick comments:
- Please use _bindir and not app_root.
- python-argparse is not available anymore. The argparse module is part of
plain python.
- You have no defattr, so I'm assuming you want to build for Fedora only. Then you can also nuke of %clean and BuildRoot
- Please use mkdir and cp directly like rm too to be consistent.
- The first mkdir is not needed anyway, the second one creates all directories
needed.
- Where come the sources from? Please add a full link.
- extra_release is not needed too. When you want to add an extra_release
sometime in the future, just add a number there (or bump the relase). No need for "%global extra_release 1".
Thank you for the comments Thomas! I appreciate the help.
Regarding:
- python-argparse is not available anymore. The argparse module is part of
plain python.
I do want to build for RHEL and Fedora. Don't I need to specify it for RHEL?
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=751564
--- Comment #9 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-07 13:41:40 EST --- %defattr is no longer required, per this: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/77
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=751564
--- Comment #10 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-07 15:58:36 EST --- Thank you Jim and Thomas for the review input.
I believe I've address everything except creating the man page and the python-argpase issue, which I am waiting for a reply to my inquiry.
The latest versions of the important documents can be found here:
Please note "/v2" not "/v1"
Spec URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v2/aeolus-audrey-agent.spec
SRPM URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v2/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.3.1-7.fc1...
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3495654
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=751564
--- Comment #11 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-08 07:55:53 EST --- Hi Joe, FYI, the optparse module has been deprecated since python2.7 in favor of the new-in-2.7 argparse module.
http://docs.python.org/library/optparse.html
Depending on which version of Python is available in other target systems, you may want to update.
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=751564
--- Comment #12 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-08 08:05:21 EST --- For the record, here's the latest --help output:
usage: audrey_startup.py [-h] [-e ENDPOINT] [-k OAUTH_KEY] [-s OAUTH_SECRET] [-p] [-L {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL}] [--version]
Audrey Start
optional arguments: -h, --help show this help message and exit -e ENDPOINT, --endpoint ENDPOINT Config Server endpoint url -k OAUTH_KEY, --key OAUTH_KEY oAuth Key -s OAUTH_SECRET, --secret OAUTH_SECRET oAuth Secret -p, --pwd Log and look for configs in pwd -L {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL}, --log_level {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL} Logging Level
Like --pw=PASSWORD before it, the oauth arguments should not be exposed on the command line. --------------------------------------
Also, I see two uses of a hard-coded URL:
$ grep 169 audrey_startup.py EC2_USER_DATA_URL = 'http://169.254.169.254/latest/user-data' self.ec2_user_data_url = 'http://169.254.169.254/latest/user-data'
Obviously the literal URL should appear only once, but the real question is whether it should appear at all.
Shouldn't it be specified via an option?
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=751564
--- Comment #13 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-08 08:31:41 EST --- (In reply to comment #12)
For the record, here's the latest --help output:
usage: audrey_startup.py [-h] [-e ENDPOINT] [-k OAUTH_KEY] [-s OAUTH_SECRET] [-p] [-L {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL}] [--version]
Audrey Start
optional arguments: -h, --help show this help message and exit -e ENDPOINT, --endpoint ENDPOINT Config Server endpoint url -k OAUTH_KEY, --key OAUTH_KEY oAuth Key -s OAUTH_SECRET, --secret OAUTH_SECRET oAuth Secret -p, --pwd Log and look for configs in pwd -L {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL}, --log_level {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL} Logging Level
Like --pw=PASSWORD before it, the oauth arguments should not be exposed on the command line.
Also, I see two uses of a hard-coded URL:
$ grep 169 audrey_startup.py EC2_USER_DATA_URL = 'http://169.254.169.254/latest/user-data' self.ec2_user_data_url = 'http://169.254.169.254/latest/user-data'Obviously the literal URL should appear only once, but the real question is whether it should appear at all.
Shouldn't it be specified via an option?
Thank you Jim.
A bad push merge by Greg Blomquist, resulted in the OAUTH arguments not being prompted for. I will work with Greg to fix the merge.
The 169 URL is the documented method for accessing AWS EC2 user-data http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/index.html?AESDG-c...
So I believe it is OK for it to be hard-coded however I agree it should not be hard-coded twice. I will change this to:
EC2_USER_DATA_URL = 'http://169.254.169.254/latest/user-data' self.ec2_user_data_url = EC2_USER_DATA_URL
Do you think that would be acceptable?
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=751564
--- Comment #14 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-08 10:01:20 EST --- sure. 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=751564
--- Comment #15 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-08 11:34:22 EST --- Created attachment 532333 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=532333 generate man page
Joe,
Once you've added a --version option, apply the patch above. Then, you'll have an automatically-generated man page. However, please also change the minimal "Audrey Start" description to be more like the 2-3-line description in the RPM spec file. Otherwise, that two-word description gets propagated to the man page like this:
AUDREY(8) System Administration Utilities AUDREY(8)
NAME audrey - Aeolus startup agent
DESCRIPTION usage: audrey [-h] [-e ENDPOINT] [-k OAUTH_KEY] [-s OAUTH_SECRET] [-p]
[-L {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL}] [--version]
Audrey Start
optional arguments: -h, --help show this help message and exit
-e ENDPOINT, --endpoint ENDPOINT Config Server endpoint url
-k OAUTH_KEY, --key OAUTH_KEY oAuth Key
-s OAUTH_SECRET, --secret OAUTH_SECRET oAuth Secret
-p, --pwd Log and look for configs in pwd
-L {DEBUG,INFO,WARNING,ERROR,CRITICAL}, --log_level {DEBUG,INFO,WARN- ING,ERROR,CRITICAL} Logging Level
--version show program's version number and exit
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=751564
--- Comment #16 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-08 16:42:41 EST --- (In reply to comment #11)
Hi Joe, FYI, the optparse module has been deprecated since python2.7 in favor of the new-in-2.7 argparse module.
http://docs.python.org/library/optparse.html
Depending on which version of Python is available in other target systems, you may want to update.
Seems this was done already with the oauth changes.
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=751564
--- Comment #17 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-08 19:18:24 EST --- The latest changes can be found here: https://github.com/aeolusproject/audrey/tree/joev
After applying the patch in attachment 532333 "make rpms" fails.
It seems the man page is created: /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8/audrey.8
But then gets compressed to: /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8/audrey.8.gz
Tail of "make rpms":
+ cp audrey_startup.py /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/bin/audrey + cp audrey.8 /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8 + ls -aFlR /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8 /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8: total 12 drwxr-xr-x. 2 jvlcek jvlcek 4096 Nov 8 19:15 ./ drwxr-xr-x. 3 jvlcek jvlcek 4096 Nov 8 19:15 ../ -rw-r--r--. 1 jvlcek jvlcek 1071 Nov 8 19:15 audrey.8 + /usr/lib/rpm/find-debuginfo.sh --strict-build-id /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILD/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0 + /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot + /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-compress + /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-strip-static-archive /usr/bin/strip + /usr/lib/rpm/brp-python-bytecompile /usr/bin/python 1 + /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-python-hardlink + /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/brp-java-repack-jars Processing files: aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.noarch error: File not found: /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8/audrey.8 Executing(%doc): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.cIYiNm + umask 022 + cd /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0 + DOCDIR=/home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/doc/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0 + export DOCDIR + /bin/mkdir -p /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/doc/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0 + cp -pr COPYING /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/doc/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0 + exit 0
RPM build errors: File not found: /home/jvlcek/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-7.fc15.x86_64/usr/share/man/man8/audrey.8 make: *** [rpms] Error 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=751564
Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #532333|0 |1 is obsolete| |
--- Comment #18 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-09 03:28:02 EST --- Created attachment 532490 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=532490 tweak spec file so "make rpms" succeeds
There were two problems. I've attached a revised patch:
tweak spec file so "make rpms" succeeds
* audrey_startup/aeolus-audrey-agent.spec.in: Install into buildroot, not directly into /usr/man. (%files): List audrey.8*, not audrey.8, to get the .gz file, too.
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=751564
--- Comment #19 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-09 10:36:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #18)
Created attachment 532490 [details] tweak spec file so "make rpms" succeeds
There were two problems. I've attached a revised patch:
tweak spec file so "make rpms" succeeds * audrey_startup/aeolus-audrey-agent.spec.in: Install into buildroot, not directly into /usr/man. (%files): List audrey.8*, not audrey.8, to get the .gz file, too.
Thank you Jim!
I had caught the "Install into buildroot not directly into /usr/man
But I was not sure of the correct way to handle the .gz file issue.
So again thank you.
I've pushed the latest changes here: https://github.com/aeolusproject/audrey/tree/joev
I have a question: Instead of hard coding the version in the audrey_start.py file as: AUDREY_VER = '0.5.1'
I would like to track it with the RPM version number.
Do you have any suggestions on how best to approach that?
Thank you! 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=751564
--- Comment #20 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-09 10:49:23 EST --- IMHO, the only way is to maintain a template (say audrey.in.py) under version control and have "AUDREY_VER = '@VERSION@' in it. Then part of the build process would be to generate audrey.py from that template while performing the simple @VERSION@-substitution, just as is done for the spec file. Note that you should retain the .py suffix, and hence .in.py, rather than .py.in, so that more tools automatically detect the file as containing python source.
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=751564
--- Comment #21 from Thomas Spura tomspur@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-09 11:05:45 EST --- (In reply to comment #8)
Regarding:
- python-argparse is not available anymore. The argparse module is part of
plain python.
I do want to build for RHEL and Fedora. Don't I need to specify it for RHEL?
How about %if it then properly? e.g. %if ! (0%{?fedora} > 14 || 0%{?rhel} > 6) BuildRequires: python-argparse %endif
I guess this is the only sane way to do this, cause python will loose the Provides for python-argparse some time in the future.
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=751564
--- Comment #22 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-09 18:51:49 EST --- (In reply to comment #21)
(In reply to comment #8)
Regarding:
- python-argparse is not available anymore. The argparse module is part of
plain python.
I do want to build for RHEL and Fedora. Don't I need to specify it for RHEL?
How about %if it then properly? e.g. %if ! (0%{?fedora} > 14 || 0%{?rhel} > 6) BuildRequires: python-argparse %endif
I guess this is the only sane way to do this, cause python will loose the Provides for python-argparse some time in the future.
Thank you again Thomas. I'll do that.
Can you please confirm, should it be BuildRequires or Requires:
Thank you! 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=751564
--- Comment #23 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-09 19:26:13 EST --- Thank you Jim and Thomas for the review input and all the help with this.
I believe I've address everything.
The latest versions of the important documents can be found here:
Please note it's now in: "/v3"
Spec URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v3/aeolus-audrey-agent.spec
SRPM URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v3/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.fc1...
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3501875
The upstream URL to the source 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=751564
--- Comment #24 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-10 10:13:46 EST --- Hi Joe, In the spec, this looks wrong:
%if ! (0%{?fedora} > 14 || 0%{?rhel} > 6) Requires: python-argparse %endif
The problem is more apparent if you rewrite without the "!":
%if (0%{?fedora} <= 14 && 0%{?rhel} <= 6) Requires: python-argparse %endif
Shouldn't it be || in place of && here? (i.e., && in place of || in the original)
%if (0%{?fedora} <= 14 || 0%{?rhel} <= 6) Requires: python-argparse %endif
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=751564
--- Comment #25 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-10 10:20:21 EST --- Hi Joe, I installed the new .src.rpm, then ran tar xf ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0.tar.gz && cd aeolus-audrey-agent && make which printed this:
make: *** No rule to make target `audrey_startup.in.py', needed by\ `audrey_startup.py'. Stop.
which means the new, required file is not included in the tarball.
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=751564
--- Comment #26 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-10 15:28:28 EST --- Hi Jim,
Huge "Thank you"! for all the help with this.
I believe I've address everything.
The latest versions of the important documents can be found here:
Please note it's now in: "/v4"
Spec URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v4/aeolus-audrey-agent.spec
SRPM URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v4/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.fc1...
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3505835
The upstream URL to the source 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=751564
--- Comment #27 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-10 16:34:54 EST --- Joe, with this, I think I am done:
$ rpmlint aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.fc15.src.rpm aeolus-audrey-agent.src: W: invalid-license ASL2.0 aeolus-audrey-agent.src: W: invalid-url Source0: aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0.tar.gz
Please fix #2: replace "ASL2" by "ASL 2.0"
The first warning would be well enough addressed by the comments if you had created/pushed a gpg-signed git tag and if the instructions said to use that.
# to build source tarball # git clone git@github.com:aeolusproject/audrey.git # make dist
However, without that, the above clone instructions are not enough to reproduce your source RPM, which is the goal, after all. Once you've fixed these things, just put the tarball in http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/ and use its URL in the Source0: directive.
Now for the .rpm:
$ rpmlint /h/j/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.fc16.noarch.rpm aeolus-audrey-agent.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2 aeolus-audrey-agent.noarch: W: invalid-license ASL2.0 aeolus-audrey-agent.noarch: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/audrey 0555L 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings
Run rpmlint with the -i option and it'll give you more details. You can address the non-standard-executable-perm error by using "install" instead of "cp". It will do what rpmlint wants: i.e., permissions of 0755, not 0555.
As I understand it, the python-httplib2 error is unwarranted and thus ignorable.
Address the above and you'll have my approval. Two "MUST" items are marked "NO" below because of the above.
=========================================================
From https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
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.[1] 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. [2] . 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 . MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. [3] 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.[4] ok MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5] ok MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
NO (upstream source URL not specified) __ 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.
ok MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture. [7] 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. [8] 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.[9] 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. [10] ok MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11] NA 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. [12] 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. [13] 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)[14] NO(0555 vs 0755, does this really matter? maybe for consistency) __ MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with executable permissions, for example. [15] ok MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16] ok MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17] 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). [18] 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. [18] NA MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [19] NA MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [20] NA 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. [19] NA MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} [21] NA MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed in the spec if they are built.[20] NA 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. [22] NA 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. [23] NA MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [24]
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. [25] NO (there are no translations) SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [26] ok SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [27] NA SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [28] NO (I haven't done this) SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package should not segfault instead of running, for example. NA SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity. [29] NA SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. [21] NA 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. [30] NA 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. [31] 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.[32]
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=751564
--- Comment #28 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-10 18:07:36 EST --- Thank you again Jim!
With this, I think we are done.
The latest versions of the important documents can be found here:
Please note it's now in: "/v5"
Spec URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v5/aeolus-audrey-agent.spec
SRPM URL: http://joev.fedorapeople.org/audrey-agent/v5/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.fc1...
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3506507
The upstream URL to the source 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=751564
Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #29 from Jim Meyering meyering@redhat.com 2011-11-11 07:47:49 EST --- 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=751564
Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: The Aeolus |Review Request: |Audrey Startup Agent |aeolus-audrey-agent - The | |Aeolus Audrey Startup Agent Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #30 from Joe VLcek JVLcek@RedHat.com 2011-11-30 09:42:27 EST --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: aeolus-audrey-agent Short Description: The Aeolus Audrey Startup Agent 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=751564
--- Comment #31 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-11-30 10:16:00 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=751564
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |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=751564
--- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-30 15:40:13 EST --- aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.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=751564
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-12-03 21:45:37 EST --- aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.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=751564
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9 | |.fc16 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2011-12-13 16:54:27
--- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-12-13 16:54:27 EST --- aeolus-audrey-agent-0.4.0-9.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla