Bug 1148049

Summary: Review Request: vpnc-script - Routing setup script for vpnc and openconnect
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <nmavrogi>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Christian Krause <chkr>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: chkr, package-review, samuel-rhbugs
Target Milestone: ---Flags: chkr: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-10-03 12:11:30 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:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1128147    

Description Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2014-09-30 15:10:42 UTC
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/vpnc-script.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/vpnc-script-20140705-1.git6201ebd.fc22.src.rpm
Description: This script sets up routing for VPN connectivity, when invoked by vpnc or openconnect.
Fedora Account System Username: nmav

Comment 1 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2014-09-30 15:12:16 UTC
Note that this package is already part of fedora as vpnc-script (subpackage of vpnc).

Comment 2 Christian Krause 2014-10-01 00:27:05 UTC
Just a quick informal review. I can do the full review tomorrow.

- rpmlint shows an error:
vpnc-script.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 020140705.git6201ebd ['20140705-1.git6201ebd.fc20', '20140705-1.git6201ebd']

- it looks like that upstream has included the unbound patch:
http://git.infradead.org/users/dwmw2/vpnc-scripts.git/commit/df5808b301ba767578ffbec966db3b9ff154f588
Would it be possible to use that version without patching?

- I would add an empty %build section to avoid an rpmlint warning - it shouldn't have any drawback and it will make it easier to spot new warnings

- since vpnc-script was moved into its own sub-package, it was marked as config:
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/vpnc/vpnc-script
I'm unsure whether any user has ever changed the script, but for 100% compatibility it should be marked the same.

Comment 3 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2014-10-01 07:50:56 UTC
Hello,
 I've updated the .spec and src.rpm to:

Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/vpnc-script.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/nmavrogi/fedora/vpnc-script-20140805-1.gitdf5808b.fc20.src.rpm

I've not handled the %config(noreplace). Let's handle this apart from the review. I don't think that a necessary script should be marked as config, since we will not be able to update it if modified (e.g., with the unbound patches). If there are modifications needed to be done to the script for local configurations we can make it run a local "sub-script" if it is present. What do you think?

Comment 4 Christian Krause 2014-10-02 06:58:39 UTC
Package Review
==============

Summary:
- one rpmlint warning regarding a wrong version in the changelog needs to be fixed

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

===== 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. (GPLv2+)
[-]: 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "GPL (v2 or later)". 
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
     Note: %defattr present but not needed
[-]: 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.
     Package will substitute an existing sub-package of vpnc (but with the same name
     and the same content). NVR of the new package is higher.
[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.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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.
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
     incoherent-version-in-changelog rpmlint error must be fixed, see below
[-]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[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]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
     Package will substitute an existing sub-package of vpnc (but with the same name
     and the same content). NVR of the new package is higher.
[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]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[ ]: 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).
[x]: 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.
[?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
     Mock build works. Package is noarch.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[.]: 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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[-]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

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

Generic:
[!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     - incoherent-version-in-changelog: needs to be fixed
     - remaining warnings can be ignored

[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: vpnc-script-20140805-1.gitdf5808b.fc20.noarch.rpm
          vpnc-script-20140805-1.gitdf5808b.fc20.src.rpm
vpnc-script.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) openconnect -> open connect, open-connect, connection
vpnc-script.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US openconnect -> open connect, open-connect, connection
vpnc-script.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 020140805-1.gitdf5808b ['20140805-1.gitdf5808b.fc20', '20140805-1.gitdf5808b']
vpnc-script.noarch: W: no-documentation
vpnc-script.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) openconnect -> open connect, open-connect, connection
vpnc-script.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US openconnect -> open connect, open-connect, connection
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint vpnc-script
vpnc-script.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) openconnect -> open connect, open-connect, connection
vpnc-script.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US openconnect -> open connect, open-connect, connection
vpnc-script.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 020140805-1.gitdf5808b ['20140805-1.gitdf5808b.fc20', '20140805-1.gitdf5808b']
vpnc-script.noarch: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.

Comment 5 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2014-10-02 08:14:51 UTC
There was a superfluous '0'. It's now removed, and the previous .spec and src.rpm are overwritten. Thanks.

Comment 6 Christian Krause 2014-10-03 10:43:54 UTC
I have checked the new package. Everything is OK now.

APPROVED.

Comment 7 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2014-10-03 11:02:05 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: vpnc-script
Short Description: This script sets up routing for VPN connectivity, when invoked by vpnc or openconnect.
Owners: nmav
Branches: master
InitialCC:

Comment 8 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-10-03 12:08:24 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 9 Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos 2014-10-03 12:11:30 UTC
Thank you.