https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265862
Bug ID: 2265862
Summary: Review Request: spiped - Create secure pipes between
socket addresses
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Status: NEW
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Assignee: [email protected]
Reporter: [email protected]
QA Contact: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]
Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora
Spec URL:
https://gitlab.com/ppentchev/fedora-packages/-/blob/main/spiped/src/spiped.spec?ref_type=heads
SRPM URL: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/roam/spiped/build/7057817/
Description:
spiped (pronounced "ess-pipe-dee") is a utility for creating symmetrically
encrypted and authenticated pipes between socket addresses, so that one may
connect to one address (e.g., a UNIX socket on localhost) and transparently
have a connection established to another address (e.g., a UNIX socket on a
different system). This is similar to 'ssh -L' functionality, but does not
use SSH and requires a pre-shared symmetric key.
spipe (pronounced "ess-pipe") is a utility which acts as an spiped protocol
client (i.e., connects to an spiped daemon), taking input from the standard
input and writing data read back to the standard output.
Fedora Account System Username: roam
This is my first Fedora package, so I will need a sponsor. Hence,
the spec currently lives in my GitLab repository, and the SRPM file is
available in COPR:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/roam/spiped/build/7057817/
A couple of notes on some fedora-review items:
[-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
Note: This project does not use gnulib.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: The rpmlint tool reports several false positives, all
misspellings. Should I create an spiped.rpmlint file to override them?
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
Note: Upstream is aware of the install.patch change (it is also
present in the Debian package of spiped that I maintain), and their
response (via private mail) was "unfortunatly install(1) isn't
a POSIX command, and I couldn't find a way to rewrite our Makefile
so that it would be easier to patch this in".
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: Upstream only provides SHA256 hashes, not OpenPGP signatures.
Thanks in advance for any comments and suggestions! Since this is my
first attempt to submit a Fedora package for review, please feel free to
point out anything I have missed (I have no doubt that there will be
something, possibly many somethings).
G'luck,
Peter
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265862
Report this comment as SPAM:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265862%23c0
--
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
