Bug 510788 (WebShell)
| Summary: | Review Request: WebShell - Encrypted shell access via web browser | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Chris Tyler <ctyler.fedora> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Ian Weller <ian> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | clj-bugz, cseay, ctyler.fedora, fardad.soleimanloo, fedora-package-review, ian, kpalmer, notting |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | ian:
fedora-review+
j: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | 0.9.6-3.fc11 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2009-08-25 04:28:26 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
Chris Tyler
2009-07-10 18:46:46 UTC
I'm taking this. woo [ OK ] specfiles match:
464c9e41ff8ccc3504dd92c43c795907 WebShell.spec
464c9e41ff8ccc3504dd92c43c795907 WebShell-0.9.6-1.fc11.src/WebShell.spec
[ OK ] source files match upstream:
5efa06473bef8dfb2049a15d99b76d8e WebShell-0.9.6.zip
5efa06473bef8dfb2049a15d99b76d8e WebShell-0.9.6-1.fc11.src/WebShell-0.9.6.zip
[ OK ] package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
[FAILED] spec is properly named, cleanly written, and uses macros consistently.
%{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT?
[ OK ] dist tag is present.
[ OK ] build root is correct.
[ OK ] license field matches the actual license.
[FAILED] license is open source-compatible.
uh www/background.jpg looks fairly familiar to something from OS X, please check
also please check with upstream on all artwork and perhaps CSS/JS
[ N/A ] license text included in package.
[ OK ] latest version is being packaged.
[ OK ] BuildRequires are proper.
[ N/A ] compiler flags are appropriate.
[ OK ] %clean is present.
[ OK ] package builds in mock.
[ OK ] package installs properly.
[ N/A ] debuginfo package looks complete.
[ OK ] rpmlint is silent.
[ OK ] final provides and requires are sane
[ N/A ] %check is present and all tests pass:
[ N/A ] no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
[ OK ] owns the directories it creates.
[ OK ] doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
[ OK ] no duplicates in %files.
[ OK ] file permissions are appropriate.
[FAILED] scriptlets match those on ScriptletSnippets page.
[ OK ] code, not content.
[ OK ] documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
[ OK ] %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
[ N/A ] no headers.
[ N/A ] no pkgconfig files.
[ N/A ] no libtool .la droppings.
[ N/A ] desktop files valid and installed properly.
Please fix these items
> [FAILED] spec is properly named, cleanly written, and uses macros consistently. > %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT? Foiled by rpmdev-newspec. Changed to macro format for consistency. > [FAILED] scriptlets match those on ScriptletSnippets page. Guidelines say: "SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity." -- it does not say that ScriptletSnippets are the only acceptable ones. This scriptlet seems sane to me, and is similar to what the ssh server package does when it generates a host key. > [FAILED] license is open source-compatible. > uh www/background.jpg looks fairly familiar to something from OS X, please check > also please check with upstream on all artwork and perhaps CSS/JS Checking with upstream. (In reply to comment #3) > > [FAILED] scriptlets match those on ScriptletSnippets page. > > Guidelines say: "SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. > This is vague, and left up to the reviewers judgement to determine sanity." -- > it does not say that ScriptletSnippets are the only acceptable ones. > > This scriptlet seems sane to me, and is similar to what the ssh server package > does when it generates a host key. I'd rather see it done as a README.fedora type of instruction or something done when first running the package. It's somewhat confusing to see when installing the RPM unless you know exactly what that stuff means. > > [FAILED] license is open source-compatible. > > uh www/background.jpg looks fairly familiar to something from OS X, please > check > > also please check with upstream on all artwork and perhaps CSS/JS > > Checking with upstream. Thanks. Two more things -- you forgot links to the fixed spec, and you need a specific Requires on openssl because of how make_certificate.sh is run. I wasn't going to post the revised spec until I heard from upstream -- but decided to replace the background image instead: SPEC: http://chris.tylers.info/rpm/WebShell.spec SRPM: http://chris.tylers.info/rpm/WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc10.src.rpm Notes: - The background.jpg image replacement is done during build (the tarball is pristine). Not sure if this is the best approach, but want to avoid a modified tarball if possible. - Added Requires: openssl Release 3 also disables %post and adds README.fedora Considered using LatteCat but didn't know the license for that image. At this point I would recommend you complain to upstream about that image but they look pretty inactive. Oh well. (In reply to comment #2) > [FIXED ] spec is properly named, cleanly written, and uses macros consistently. > [FIXED ] license is open source-compatible. > [FIXED ] scriptlets match those on ScriptletSnippets page. --------------------------------------------------------- This package (WebShell) is APPROVED by me (ianweller) --------------------------------------------------------- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: WebShell Short Description: SSL server for web-based SSH access from browsers and mobile devices Owners: ctyler Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: CVS done. WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc11 WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc10 WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update WebShell'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F11/FEDORA-2009-8196 WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update WebShell'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2009-8219 WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. WebShell-0.9.6-3.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |