xReview for Package: raqm [Summary] MIR team ACK, under the constraint that the autopktests possible enhancements are a little bit more explored (see below) and that check (I didn’t see any rationale in the request) on why raqm hasn’t been updated despite having new releases for a year now.
Recommended TODOs: - check if the autopkgtests can be enhanced - check why 0.7.1 and 0.7.2 ara available (from Nov 2020 for the former) without any update on debian/ubuntu. As the package hasn’t changed for multiple releases. I think those fixes are not distro-patched either. [Duplication] There is no other package in main providing the same functionality. [Dependencies] OK: - no other Dependencies to MIR due to this - checked with check-mir - not listed in seeded-in-ubuntu - none of the (potentially auto-generated) dependencies (Depends and Recommends) that are present after build are not in main - no -dev/-debug/-doc packages that need exclusion - No dependencies in main that are only superficially tested requiring more tests now. [Embedded sources and static linking] OK: - no embedded source present - no static linking - does not have odd Built-Using entries OK: - not a go package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard - No vendoring used, all Built-Using are in main [Security] OK: - history of CVEs does not look concerning - does not run a daemon as root - does not use webkit1,2 - does not use lib*v8 directly - does not parse data formats - does not open a port/socket - does not process arbitrary web content - does not use centralized online accounts - does not integrate arbitrary javascript into the desktop - does not deal with system authentication (eg, pam), etc) - does not deal with security attestation (secure boot, tpm, signatures) [Common blockers] OK: - does not FTBFS currently - does have a test suite that runs at build time - test suite fails will fail the build upon error. - no new python2 dependency Problems: - the autopkgtest test is trivial: build it, run it, don’t check the output. Can we maybe check the output given known inputs and see what is returned is expected? [Packaging red flags] OK: - Ubuntu does not carry a delta - symbols tracking is in place - d/watch is present and looks ok (if needed, e.g. non-native) - Upstream update history is slow, but seems in maintainance mode - Debian/Ubuntu update history is slow - promoting this does not seem to cause issues for MOTUs that so far maintained the package - no massive Lintian warnings (only older lintian version used) - d/rules is rather clean - It is not on the lto-disabled list (fix, or the work-around should be directly in the package, see https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lto-disabled-list) Problems: - the current release and previous one is not packaged. The previous release is more than one year old. [Upstream red flags] OK: - no Errors/warnings during the build - no incautious use of malloc/sprintf (as far as we can check it) - no use of sudo, gksu, pkexec, or LD_LIBRARY_PATH (usage is OK inside tests) - no use of user nobody - no use of setuid - no important open bugs (crashers, etc) in Debian or Ubuntu - no dependency on webkit, qtwebkit, seed or libgoa-* - not part of the UI for extra checks ** Changed in: raqm (Ubuntu) Status: New => Incomplete -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1951069 Title: [MIR] raqm To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/raqm/+bug/1951069/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
