[Bug 854764] Review Request:openshift-origin-port-proxy - Script to configure HAProxy to do port forwarding for OpenShift Origin

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=854764

--- Comment #8 from Michael Scherer <misc@xxxxxxxx> ---

Package Review
==============

Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated


Issues:
=======
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
     found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#ValidLicenseShortNames

[!]: Package functions as described.
See bugzilla for comment about the sysconfig file

[!]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names
%post restorecon use /var/lib/ instrad of %_localstatedir as used before

[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
Too much requires, as said in the review, and I would favor 
consistency over trying to have something leaner ( ie, it won't work
if not everybody does this ). I would also recommend to comment the
various Requires.

[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
/etc/stickshift/ is unowned 

[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
/etc/stickshift/ is unowned

[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
     from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
(took the liberty of doing it : https://github.com/openshift/crankcase/pull/505
)

[!]: Hidden file or directory, seems rpmlint do not like this. That would
also solve the issue of having 1 single configuration file.

[!]: /etc/sysconfig/stickshift-proxy is a directory, while it would be more
consistent to have
it be a file ( and that would fix bug where systemd file is not correctly
opening the file, see earlier comment )

===== MUST items =====

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]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
     supported primary architecture.
[-]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[-]: 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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. No licenses
     found. Please check the source files for licenses manually.
[!]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
     Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
     in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
     %{name}.spec.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[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)
[!]: 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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
     --requires).
[!]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[!]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
     Note: Source0 (openshift-origin-port-proxy-0.2.3.tar.gz)
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: 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.
[!]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
     Note: %define with_systemd 1 %define with_systemd 0

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
     arched.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: openshift-origin-port-proxy-0.2.3-1.fc17.src.rpm
          openshift-origin-port-proxy-0.2.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: no-documentation
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/sysconfig/stickshift-proxy/stickshift-proxy.env
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/var/lib/stickshift/.stickshift-proxy.d
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm
/var/lib/stickshift/.stickshift-proxy.d 0750L
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/var/lib/stickshift/.stickshift-proxy.d
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary
stickshift-proxy-cfg
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint openshift-origin-port-proxy
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: no-documentation
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/sysconfig/stickshift-proxy/stickshift-proxy.env
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/var/lib/stickshift/.stickshift-proxy.d
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm
/var/lib/stickshift/.stickshift-proxy.d 0750L
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/var/lib/stickshift/.stickshift-proxy.d
openshift-origin-port-proxy.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary
stickshift-proxy-cfg
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
openshift-origin-port-proxy-0.2.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

    /bin/bash  
    /bin/sh  
    config(openshift-origin-port-proxy) = 0.2.3-1.fc17
    coreutils  
    haproxy  
    initscripts  
    iproute  
    sed  
    systemd-units  
    util-linux-ng  



Provides
--------
openshift-origin-port-proxy-0.2.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm:

    config(openshift-origin-port-proxy) = 0.2.3-1.fc17
    openshift-origin-port-proxy = 0.2.3-1.fc17



MD5-sum check
-------------
https://mirror.openshift.com/pub/openshift-origin/source/openshift-origin-port-proxy/openshift-origin-port-proxy-0.2.3.tar.gz
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
5984aa174e07c2ce44dd18d6b8f4ac3226743e016498c58c9897d7b450286385
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
5984aa174e07c2ce44dd18d6b8f4ac3226743e016498c58c9897d7b450286385


Generated by fedora-review 0.2.0 (Unknown) last change: Unknown
Command line :./try-fedora-review -b 854764

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]