https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2432682
Ben Beasley <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|[email protected] |[email protected] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Ben Beasley <[email protected]> --- I’ve officially taken the review. I found just a few more details that need to be looked at before this can be approved. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ==== Issues ==== - Many source files indicate that they are derived from muduo. I think bundling should be indicated here. # Many source files indicate in comments that they are derived from muduo # (http://code.google.com/p/muduo/, https://github.com/chenshuo/muduo), with # or without significant changes. It is not easy to tell what version of # muduo was used as the basis for these files. We document this as a case of # bundling, but since muduo appears not to be actively maintained, it is # written for an older C++ standard version, and some of the code from muduo # has been significantly adapted for trantor, it doesn’t appear to be a # candidate for unbundling. Provides: bundled(muduo) - The README.md file is installed with the execute bit set, which isn’t necessary or really correct. trantor.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/trantor/README.md I sent a PR upstream for this; please consider applying it as a patch. # Remove spurious executable permissions from non-script sources # https://github.com/an-tao/trantor/pull/395 Patch: %{url}/pull/395.patch - In trantor/net/inner/tlsprovider/OpenSSLProvider.cc, the library explicitly sets the OpenSSL cipher list: // Disable weak ciphers. Weak hash and ciphers can die in a fire. int status = SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list(ctx->ctx(), "MEDIUM:HIGH:!aNULL:!MD5:!RC4:!3DES"); This is correctly flagged by rpmlint: trantor.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl /usr/lib64/libtrantor.so.1.5.26 SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list As documented in https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/CryptoPolicies/#_cc_applications, you will need to carry a downstream patch that replaces the string "MEDIUM:HIGH:!aNULL:!MD5:!RC4:!3DES" with "PROFILE=SYSTEM". ==== Notes ==== - I see that third_party/ contains a version of https://github.com/piscisaureus/wepoll, which is used only on Windows. The license is BSD-2-Clause, which is acceptable for Fedora, so this can be distributed in the source RPM. You correctly remove it in %prep to prove it is not used in the build. - Excluding i686 from the beginning, as you have done, was a good idea. - I see that the License file contains terms both for trantor and for muduo, which is good. Both are BSD-3-Clause, so the License field is correct. - I like adding a trailing slash to directories in %files lists, like %{_includedir}/trantor/ instead of %{_includedir}/trantor which makes it clearer to the reader that a directory is intended, and which won’t match a file of the same name. You’ve already done this for %{_libdir}/cmake/Trantor/ but this is just a style suggestion, and no change is required. ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. 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", "BSD 3-Clause License". 145 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/20260202/2432682-trantor/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. I suppose one could argue about whether muduo should really be considered bundling, but I think it would be best to document it as a case of bundling. There is enough shared code or similarity that a hypothetical security-relevant bug in muduo could also be found to affect trantor, which is one of the main reasons for indicating bundling. See Issues for suggestions. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: 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. [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 %license. [x]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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]: 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]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 1294 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in trantor- devel (fedora-review is wrong; trantor-devel has *exactly* the above) [x]: Package functions as described. (tests pass) [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=142158488 [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: trantor-1.5.26-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm trantor-devel-1.5.26-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm trantor-1.5.26-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpk6hswhfa')] checks: 32, packages: 3 trantor.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/trantor/README.md trantor-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation trantor.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl /usr/lib64/libtrantor.so.1.5.26 SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 25 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: trantor-debuginfo-1.5.26-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpue4t7w4s')] checks: 32, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 6 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.8.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 3 trantor.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/trantor/README.md trantor-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation trantor.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl /usr/lib64/libtrantor.so.1.5.26 SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 25 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/an-tao/trantor/archive/v1.5.26/trantor-1.5.26.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e47092938aaf53d51c8bc72d8f54ebdcf537e6e4ac9c8276f3539413d6dfeddf CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e47092938aaf53d51c8bc72d8f54ebdcf537e6e4ac9c8276f3539413d6dfeddf Requires -------- trantor (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libcares.so.2()(64bit) libcrypto.so.3()(64bit) libcrypto.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit) libssl.so.3()(64bit) libssl.so.3(OPENSSL_3.0.0)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.11)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.13)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.15)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.3)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.5)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.7)(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) trantor-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cmake-filesystem(x86-64) libtrantor.so.1()(64bit) trantor(x86-64) Provides -------- trantor: libtrantor.so.1()(64bit) trantor trantor(x86-64) trantor-devel: cmake(Trantor) cmake(trantor) trantor-devel trantor-devel(x86-64) Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2432682 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic Disabled plugins: Perl, Java, Ocaml, SugarActivity, PHP, fonts, Haskell, R, Python Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH -- 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=2432682 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202432682%23c4 -- _______________________________________________ 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://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
