Bug 1284982
| Summary: | Review Request: nodejs-iconv - Text recoding in JavaScript for fun and profit | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Tom Hughes <tom> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Piotr Popieluch <piotr1212> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | package-review, piotr1212 |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | piotr1212:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2015-11-27 09:30:35 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: | 956806 | ||
|
Description
Tom Hughes
2015-11-24 15:34:42 UTC
tomh's scratch build of nodejs-iconv-2.1.11-1.fc23.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11968807 rpmlint gives me two errors: nodejs-iconv.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib/node_modules/iconv/build/Release/iconv.node 775 nodejs-iconv.x86_64: E: backup-file-in-package /usr/lib/node_modules/iconv/lib/iconv.js.orig Package is not "hardened" https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Harden_All_Packages checksec --file ./usr/lib/node_modules/iconv/build/Release/iconv.node Partial RELRO Canary found NX enabled DSO No RPATH No RUNPATH Exporting LDFLAGS will fix the "Partial RELRO" part, not sure about the DSO/PIE part. eg. export LDFLAGS="%{?__global_ldflags}" I expect more node modules will have to be modified. For some unknown reason fedora-review fails to install the package. I can install it manually, think I have some issue with fedora-review, the review also lasted longer than one hour to run. I will rerun/try to find out what is going on later. There's an open bug (and discussion on fedora-devel) about reviews taking a long time. The DSO thing is fine - it's saying that PIE is not relevant because it's a shared library rather than an executable. Everything else should be fixed by this new version: Spec URL: http://tomh.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-iconv.spec SRPM URL: http://tomh.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-iconv-2.1.11-2.fc23.src.rpm Looks fine. fedora-review is still complains about not being able to install without producing any useful log why. I can install the rpm manually and think it is related to the fedora-review issues, so approving. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "LGPL (v2 or later)", "*No copyright* ISC", "ISC GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 54 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/piotr/rpmbuild/1284982 -nodejs-iconv/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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. [-]: 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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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]: 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 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]: Dist tag is present. [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 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]: 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). [!]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in nodejs- iconv-debuginfo [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [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. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.13 starting (python version = 3.4.3)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled ccache Mock Version: 1.2.13 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.13 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/piotr/rpmbuild/1284982-nodejs-iconv/results/nodejs-iconv-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/piotr/rpmbuild/1284982-nodejs-iconv/results/nodejs-iconv-debuginfo-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/piotr/rpmbuild/1284982-nodejs-iconv/results/nodejs-iconv-debuginfo-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 24 install /home/piotr/rpmbuild/1284982-nodejs-iconv/results/nodejs-iconv-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/piotr/rpmbuild/1284982-nodejs-iconv/results/nodejs-iconv-debuginfo-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm /home/piotr/rpmbuild/1284982-nodejs-iconv/results/nodejs-iconv-debuginfo-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: nodejs-iconv-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm nodejs-iconv-debuginfo-2.1.11-2.fc24.x86_64.rpm nodejs-iconv-2.1.11-2.fc24.src.rpm nodejs-iconv.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) recoding -> recording, receding, decoding nodejs-iconv.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recoding -> recording, receding, decoding nodejs-iconv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) recoding -> recording, receding, decoding nodejs-iconv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US recoding -> recording, receding, decoding 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Requires -------- nodejs-iconv-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): nodejs-iconv (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit) libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6()(64bit) libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit) nodejs(abi) nodejs(engine) nodejs(v8-abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- nodejs-iconv-debuginfo: nodejs-iconv-debuginfo nodejs-iconv-debuginfo(x86-64) nodejs-iconv: nodejs-iconv nodejs-iconv(x86-64) npm(iconv) Source checksums ---------------- https://registry.npmjs.org/iconv/-/iconv-2.1.11.tgz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : abf08900216fc54e2e56266377254fe0c9b344eed8b34514b0c58529e8be1c2f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : abf08900216fc54e2e56266377254fe0c9b344eed8b34514b0c58529e8be1c2f Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1284982 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++ Disabled plugins: Java, Python, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/nodejs-iconv |