https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Bug ID: 1103927 Summary: Review Request: imaptest - A generic IMAP server compliancy tester Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/imaptest.spec SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/imaptest-20140528-1.src.rpm Description: ImapTest is a generic IMAP server compliancy tester that works with all IMAP servers. It supports stress testing with state tracking, scripted testing and benchmarking. When stress testing with state tracking ImapTest sends random commands to the server and verifies that server's output looks correct. Using the scripted testing ImapTest runs a list of predefined scripted tests and verifies that server returns expected output.
Examples and details are provided online at: http://www.imapwiki.org/ImapTest
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Christopher Meng i@cicku.me changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |i@cicku.me Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |i@cicku.me Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Christopher Meng i@cicku.me --- Fine to swap with bug 1096138?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Christopher Meng i@cicku.me changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Christopher Meng i@cicku.me --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 32 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck:
Unknown or generated -------------------- imaptest-20140528/ltmain.sh imaptest-20140528/src/checkpoint.c imaptest-20140528/src/checkpoint.h imaptest-20140528/src/client-state.c imaptest-20140528/src/client-state.h imaptest-20140528/src/client.c imaptest-20140528/src/client.h imaptest-20140528/src/commands.c imaptest-20140528/src/commands.h imaptest-20140528/src/imaptest-lmtp.c imaptest-20140528/src/imaptest-lmtp.h imaptest-20140528/src/imaptest.c imaptest-20140528/src/imapurl.c imaptest-20140528/src/imapurl.h imaptest-20140528/src/mailbox-source.c imaptest-20140528/src/mailbox-source.h imaptest-20140528/src/mailbox-state.c imaptest-20140528/src/mailbox-state.h imaptest-20140528/src/mailbox.c imaptest-20140528/src/mailbox.h imaptest-20140528/src/profile-parse.c imaptest-20140528/src/profile.c imaptest-20140528/src/profile.h imaptest-20140528/src/search.c imaptest-20140528/src/search.h imaptest-20140528/src/settings.h imaptest-20140528/src/test-exec.c imaptest-20140528/src/test-exec.h imaptest-20140528/src/test-parser.c imaptest-20140528/src/test-parser.h imaptest-20140528/src/user.c imaptest-20140528/src/user.h
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: %defattr present but not needed [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 61440 bytes in 5 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [x]: Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot: present but not needed [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: %clean present but not required [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: imaptest-20140528-1.fc21.i686.rpm imaptest-20140528-1.fc21.src.rpm imaptest.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) compliancy -> compliance, com pliancy, com-pliancy imaptest.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US compliancy -> compliance, com pliancy, com-pliancy imaptest.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark imaptest.i686: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.imapwiki.org/ImapTest <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> imaptest.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imaptest imaptest.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) compliancy -> compliance, com pliancy, com-pliancy imaptest.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US compliancy -> compliance, com pliancy, com-pliancy imaptest.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark imaptest.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.imapwiki.org/ImapTest <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> imaptest.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://dovecot.org/nightly/imaptest/imaptest-20140528.tar.gz <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint imaptest imaptest.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) compliancy -> compliance, com pliancy, com-pliancy imaptest.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US compliancy -> compliance, com pliancy, com-pliancy imaptest.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US benchmarking -> bench marking, bench-marking, benchmark imaptest.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary imaptest 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:'
Requires -------- imaptest (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6 libdovecot-lda.so.0 libdovecot.so.0 libm.so.6 rtld(GNU_HASH)
Provides -------- imaptest: imaptest imaptest(x86-32)
Source checksums ---------------- http://dovecot.org/nightly/imaptest/imaptest-20140528.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 04a61d6c2fae526bbd69e6b3b87a1448f0dc0ea1f2b8e1be0cdf8457b76e8d17 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 04a61d6c2fae526bbd69e6b3b87a1448f0dc0ea1f2b8e1be0cdf8457b76e8d17
Generated by fedora-review 0.5.1 (bb9bf27) last change: 2013-12-13 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -rvn imaptest-20140528-1.src.rpm Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG
---------------------------- PACKAGE APPROVED.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Robert Scheck redhat@linuxnetz.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #3 from Robert Scheck redhat@linuxnetz.de --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: imaptest Short Description: A generic IMAP server compliancy tester Upstream URL: http://www.imapwiki.org/ImapTest Owners: robert Branches: f20 f19 epel7 InitialCC:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Dominic Hopf dmaphy@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dmaphy@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #4 from Dominic Hopf dmaphy@fedoraproject.org --- I'm having issues running this on an x86_64 system:
% imaptest imaptest: error while loading shared libraries: libdovecot-lda.so.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
% yum provides libdovecot-lda.so.0
Loaded plugins: changelog, etckeeper, langpacks, remove-with-leaves, show-leaves 1:dovecot-2.2.7-2.fc20.i686 : Secure imap and pop3 server Repo : fedora Matched from: Provides : libdovecot-lda.so.0
1:dovecot-2.2.13-1.fc20.i686 : Secure imap and pop3 server Repo : updates Matched from: Provides : libdovecot-lda.so.0
% rpm -q dovecot dovecot-2.2.13-1.fc20.x86_64
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Christopher Meng i@cicku.me changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review+ fedora-cvs? |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
--- Comment #5 from Christopher Meng i@cicku.me --- Confirmed, 32bits doesn't work as well...
I first thought it was caused by some rpath issues, but seems that's not the right clue.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Robert Scheck redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mhlavink@redhat.com
--- Comment #6 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de --- Dominic, thank you very much for catching this. After some analysis and if I am not mistaken this is a bug in the dovecot RPM package where *.la files are removed (these contain the necessary -rpath call):
http://dovecot.2317879.n4.nabble.com/dovecot-2-0-pigeonhole-0-2-1-installati...
Instead of keeping the *.la files some -rpath patching should be likely added to /usr/lib/dovecot/dovecot-config (which can happen downstream only, IIRC). Adding dovecot package maintainer on Cc to get this proper solved in Fedora and RHEL 7.
For the time being I would like use the following workaround:
--- snipp --- --- imaptest.spec 2014-06-03 00:05:11.000000000 +0200 +++ imaptest.spec.rsc 2014-06-20 19:58:45.000000000 +0200 @@ -23,6 +23,9 @@ %prep %setup -q
+# Workaround for https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927#c4 (and later) +sed -e 's@(^LIBDOVECOT .*)@\1 -Wl,-rpath -Wl,%{_libdir}/dovecot@' -i src/Makefile.in + %build %configure --with-dovecot=%{_libdir}/dovecot make %{?_smp_mflags} --- snapp ---
Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/imaptest.spec SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/imaptest-20140528-2.src.rpm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
--- Comment #7 from Christopher Meng i@cicku.me --- I thought it's caused by rpath, but failed on 32bits made me change my opinion ;) I was wrong ;)
I will finish the review tomorrow.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
--- Comment #8 from Dominic Hopf dmaphy@fedoraproject.org --- Works for me now, thanks for the prompt fix. :-)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
--- Comment #9 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de --- Christopher, anything new here?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Robert Scheck redhat-bugzilla@linuxnetz.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(i@cicku.me)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Christopher Meng i@cicku.me changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(i@cicku.me) |
--- Comment #10 from Christopher Meng i@cicku.me --- I want to test it against some real service... As I was sloppy on this review.
I will approve tomorrow.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Christopher Meng i@cicku.me changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #11 from Christopher Meng i@cicku.me --- PACKAGE APPROVED.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Robert Scheck redhat@linuxnetz.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #12 from Robert Scheck redhat@linuxnetz.de --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: imaptest Short Description: A generic IMAP server compliancy tester Upstream URL: http://www.imapwiki.org/ImapTest Owners: robert Branches: f19 f20 f21 epel7 InitialCC:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
--- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- imaptest-20140528-2.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/imaptest-20140528-2.fc20
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- imaptest-20140528-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/imaptest-20140528-2.fc19
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- imaptest-20140711-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 testing repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |imaptest-20140711-1.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2014-08-01 02:00:46
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- imaptest-20140711-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103927
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|imaptest-20140711-1.fc19 |imaptest-20140711-1.fc20
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- imaptest-20140711-1.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 stable repository.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Red Hat Bugzilla