Bug 1096138

Summary:	Review Request: asdcplib - AS-DCP file access library
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Christopher Meng <i>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Robert Scheck <redhat-bugzilla>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	i, kwizart, negativo17, package-review, redhat-bugzilla
Target Milestone:	---	Flags:	redhat: fedora-review?
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:	NotReady
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2017-03-06 13:33:53 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Christopher Meng 2014-05-09 09:37:37 UTC

Spec URL: http://misc.cicku.me/fedora/asdcplib.spec
SRPM URL: http://misc.cicku.me/fedora/asdcplib-1.12.58-1.fc21.src.rpm
Description: The asdcplib library is a set of objects that offer simplified access to files conforming to the sound and picture track file formats developed by the SMPTE Working Group DC28.20 (now TC 21DC) and the MXF Interop “Sound & Picture Track File” format.

The following SMPTE standards (and their normative references) are supported:

- 377M-2004
- 381M-2005
- 382M-2007
- 429-3-2006
- 429-4-2006
- 429-5-2008
- 429-6-2006
- 429-10-2008

asdcplib supports reading and writing MXF files containing sound (PCM), 
picture (JPEG 2000 or MPEG-2) and timed-text (XML) essence. Plaintext and 
ciphertext are both supported using OpenSSL for cryptographic support. An 
object-oriented API is provided along with a command-line program asdcp-test 
that provides access to most of the API.

Fedora Account System Username: cicku

Comment 1 Christopher Meng 2014-06-20 04:06:51 UTC

NEW SRPM URL: https://mega.co.nz/#!OdAhES6J!dMGj7bu6glQ-l_nw32gpropML_J4SWayT5fgKVluyBg

Comment 2 Robert Scheck 2014-06-20 12:09:52 UTC

There are some rpmlint errors that IMHO should not happen (rpath) and README
file should not be executable:

asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-test ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kmuuidgen ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/blackwave ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/j2c-test ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-info ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-wrap ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so /usr/lib64/libssl.so.10
asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so /usr/lib64/libexpat.so.1
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/klvsplit ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libkumu-1.12.58.so /lib64/libssl.so.10
asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libkumu-1.12.58.so /lib64/libm.so.6
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kmfilegen ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kmrandgen ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-unwrap ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/klvwalk ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-util ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/wavesplit ['/usr/lib64']
asdcplib.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/asdcplib/README

Additionally I am wondering about non-conform library soname/versioning:
- /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so
- /usr/lib64/libkumu-1.12.58.so
Is this really correct and expected? Usually it is libfoo.so.1.2.3 or so.

asdcplib-1.12.58/src/KM_tai.cpp and asdcplib-1.12.58/src/KM_tai.h are under
public domain not BSD...shouldn't this be added to license tag?

Comment 3 Christopher Meng 2014-06-23 08:51:53 UTC

(In reply to Robert Scheck from comment #2)
> There are some rpmlint errors that IMHO should not happen (rpath) and README
> file should not be executable:
> 
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-test
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kmuuidgen
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/blackwave
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/j2c-test
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-info
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-wrap
> ['/usr/lib64']

Fixed.

> asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
> /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so /usr/lib64/libssl.so.10
> asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
> /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so /usr/lib64/libexpat.so.1
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
> /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/klvsplit
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
> /usr/lib64/libkumu-1.12.58.so /lib64/libssl.so.10
> asdcplib.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
> /usr/lib64/libkumu-1.12.58.so /lib64/libm.so.6

Fixed.

> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kmfilegen
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kmrandgen
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-unwrap
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/klvwalk
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/asdcp-util
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/wavesplit
> ['/usr/lib64']
> asdcplib.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/asdcplib/README

Fixed.

> Additionally I am wondering about non-conform library soname/versioning:
> - /usr/lib64/libasdcp-1.12.58.so
> - /usr/lib64/libkumu-1.12.58.so
> Is this really correct and expected? Usually it is libfoo.so.1.2.3 or so.

That's defined by upstream , I, unlikely will change that.

We have some packages with such naming, like libcutl.

> asdcplib-1.12.58/src/KM_tai.cpp and asdcplib-1.12.58/src/KM_tai.h are under
> public domain not BSD...shouldn't this be added to license tag?

I will ask upstream.

SRPM won't be attached until the license problem is clear.

Thanks.

Comment 4 Christopher Meng 2015-10-27 11:54:08 UTC

Hi,

I think a mention for code from DJB is needed, should be public domain indeed.

Sorry for taking so long on this, please review.

Spec URL: http://cicku.me/asdcplib.spec
SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/asdcplib-1.12.60-1.fc24.src.rpm

Comment 5 Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) 2017-02-13 21:02:19 UTC

@christopher
This review has stalled I've submitted another one at #1421851
Your review URL currently lead to 404 errors, can you please re-upload your spec and src.rpm or would you mind closing this review ?

Comment 6 Simone Caronni 2017-03-06 13:33:53 UTC

No feedback after 3 weeks and the poster has not updated the ticket since 2015.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1421851 ***