[Bug 1846175] Review Request: trojan - an unidentifiable proxy software

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1846175



--- Comment #12 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> ---
This looks good.  If you still need a sponsor, send email to me at
loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx so we can discuss the matter.

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

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated

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

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[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]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/systemd,
     /usr/lib/systemd/system

     This is normal for simple systemd services.

[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: 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.
[x]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 11 files.
[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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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]: No %config files under /usr.
[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]: systemd_post is invoked in %post, systemd_preun in %preun, and
     systemd_postun in %postun for Systemd service files.
     Note: Systemd service file(s) in trojan
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
[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: No rpmlint messages.
[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: trojan-1.16.0-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
          trojan-debuginfo-1.16.0-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
          trojan-debugsource-1.16.0-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
          trojan-1.16.0-4.fc33.src.rpm
trojan.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl /usr/bin/trojan
SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list
trojan.src: W: invalid-url Source2:
https://pgp.key-server.io/0xA1DDD486533B0112 HTTP Error 502: Bad Gateway
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: trojan-debuginfo-1.16.0-4.fc33.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
trojan.x86_64: W: crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl /usr/bin/trojan
SSL_CTX_set_cipher_list
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

- The crypto-policy-non-compliance-openssl complaint is not an issue, because
  the packaged config file contains this:

  "cipher": "PROFILE=SYSTEM",
  "cipher_tls13": "PROFILE=SYSTEM",

Source checksums
----------------
https://pgp.key-server.io/0xA1DDD486533B0112 :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
c8d4357bf02b6d4dcd2e595c957ce51186e34191be3a212c88dc3640d362d514
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
c8d4357bf02b6d4dcd2e595c957ce51186e34191be3a212c88dc3640d362d514
https://github.com/trojan-gfw/trojan/releases/download/v1.16.0/trojan-1.16.0.tar.gz.asc
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
a8bf500051427345b537bc98698f16e0a43c3b1e4e9218561a4575c510c3605c
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
a8bf500051427345b537bc98698f16e0a43c3b1e4e9218561a4575c510c3605c
https://github.com/trojan-gfw/trojan/archive/v1.16.0.tar.gz#/trojan-1.16.0.tar.gz
:
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
86cdb2685bb03a63b62ce06545c41189952f1ec4a0cd9147450312ed70956cbc
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
86cdb2685bb03a63b62ce06545c41189952f1ec4a0cd9147450312ed70956cbc

Requires
--------
trojan (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /bin/sh
    config(trojan)
    libboost_program_options.so.1.73.0()(64bit)
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit)
    libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libmariadb.so.3()(64bit)
    libmariadb.so.3(libmysqlclient_18)(64bit)
    libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
    libssl.so.1.1()(64bit)
    libssl.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit)
    libssl.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_1)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

trojan-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

trojan-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

Provides
--------
trojan:
    config(trojan)
    trojan
    trojan(x86-64)

trojan-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    trojan-debuginfo
    trojan-debuginfo(x86-64)

trojan-debugsource:
    trojan-debugsource
    trojan-debugsource(x86-64)

Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1846175 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, C/C++
Disabled plugins: Haskell, R, Ocaml, Ruby, fonts, Perl, SugarActivity, Python,
Java, PHP
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH


-- 
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