[Bug 1778530] Review Request: libfido2 - FIDO2 libraries and utilities for support of U2F / WebAuthn

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1778530



--- Comment #2 from Gary Buhrmaster <gary.buhrmaster@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Daiki Ueno from comment #1)
> Thank you for working on this; please find below the review.


Thanks for your review (sorry for taking so long to reply, life happens). 
Comments inline follow:


> Issues:
> =======
> - ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.

Accepted/Completed - My only (weak) defense is that the existing ldconfig
%post/%postun was a legacy of starting this before the new file trigger support
was in place.  I should have seen it (I did in other packages I maintain).

> - Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
> ...
>   -> I think this is okay, as it's a runtime library that applications
>      (e.g. OpenSSH) use.

Acknowledged, will remain.

> - Static libraries in -static or -devel subpackage, providing -devel if
>   present.
> ....
>  -> Please remove .a files in %build or %install.

Accepted/Completed (.a files removed in %install)

> - fido2-tools should have a fully versioned dependency on libfido2.

Accepted/Completed (requirements updated)

>  I'm also not sure if this explicit naming is ok; I would rather
>  use libfido2-tools.

I selected the name to be compatible with the debian packages that upstream
provides.  My initial thought was name compatibility was likely desirable to
try to minimize unnecessary distro differences.  If you prefer libfido2-tools I
can make that change, but I have not for this spec update.

I await further feedback.

> - It would be good to bundle the gpg signature and verify it at %prep.

Currently the project does not sign releases.  I have opened an issue with the
project requesting that they do include signatures for future releases.

As there is currently not a verifiable project release key, as I understand the
packaging guidelines, this is not currently required.

----

In addition to the requested changes, a new rpm requirement (that was
self-identified as missing) of u2f-hidraw-policy was added to the package to
help udev properly set permissions on u2f keys at insert.



Current spec/SRPMs:

Spec URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/gtb/libfido2/fedora-31-x86_64/01129329-libfido2/libfido2.spec

SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/gtb/libfido2/fedora-31-x86_64/01129329-libfido2/libfido2-1.3.0-2.fc31.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux