Bug 895073

Summary: Review Request: dnscrypt - Tool for securing communications between a client and a DNS resolver
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Marcel Wysocki <maci>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Christopher Meng <i>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: abradshaw, bugzilla.redhat.com, i, maci, mattia.verga, misc, package-review, paul.lipps
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-12-08 00:45:51 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: 201449    

Description Marcel Wysocki 2013-01-14 13:35:26 UTC
Spec URL: http://maci.satgnu.net/rpmbuild/SPECS/dnscrypt.spec
SRPM URL: http://maci.satgnu.net/rpmbuild/SRPMS/dnscrypt-1.2.0-3.fc18.src.rpm
Description: dnscrypt-proxy provides local service which can be used directly as 
your local resolver or as a DNS forwarder, encrypting and authenticating
requests using the DNSCrypt protocol and passing them to an 
upstream server, by default OpenDNS who run this on their resolvers.
Fedora Account System Username: maci


Koji URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4866988

Comment 1 Michael S. 2013-01-19 16:43:01 UTC
This bundle libnacl and libevent :
src/libevent 
stc/libnacl

Comment 2 Marcel Wysocki 2013-01-20 09:28:41 UTC
Informed upstream.
Waiting for response.

Comment 3 Marcel Wysocki 2013-01-21 11:22:58 UTC
Answer from Upstream:


The bundled libraries are modified versions, with extra features that are required for dnscrypt-proxy.

Namely, support for TXT records has been added to lib event, as well as the ability to use a custom PRG.

A vanilla libnacl wouldn't work either, but it will eventually be replaced by libsodium, that you can package separately.

Also, maybe it would be good to enable support for plugins in your package, and also build a server package in addition to just the client.

------------------------------------------------------------

Comment 4 Michael S. 2013-01-21 20:49:15 UTC
I guess then this is in fesco hand. 

Did they tried to push upstream the code for libevent ?

Comment 5 Marcel Wysocki 2013-01-22 11:20:49 UTC
Upstream:

 Hi Marcel,

  libevent 2.0 is in feature freeze mode and is unlikely to accept this kind of changes.

  I'm planning to submit these patches for libevent 2.1, but it is still in alpha.

  And I wouldn't be comfortable with using an alpha version of this library for dnscrypt.

Comment 6 Christopher Meng 2013-07-14 08:49:15 UTC
I will take this.

Please update.

Comment 7 Marcel Wysocki 2013-07-26 09:12:39 UTC
libevent 2.1 is still not released.

Comment 8 Christopher Meng 2013-09-12 01:36:29 UTC
Added NotReady.

When libevent 2.1 released, please clean the WhiteBoard and lift needinfo on me.

Comment 9 Christopher Meng 2014-06-24 02:20:20 UTC
libsodium is now in the repo.

Comment 10 Christopher Meng 2014-06-24 02:59:37 UTC
Couldn't we request an temporary exception from FESCo?

Comment 11 Marcel Wysocki 2014-09-29 13:53:24 UTC
anyone else willing to take this over ?

Comment 12 Upstream Release Monitoring 2015-09-24 15:04:49 UTC
jgrulich's scratch build of kdevelop?#c8e2b9bc57f11e41f3dc6612cdbcc591078d9062 for f22-candidate and git://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/kdevelop?#c8e2b9bc57f11e41f3dc6612cdbcc591078d9062 completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11212117

Comment 13 Package Review 2020-07-10 00:47:54 UTC
This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems
that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please
respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the
submitter to proceed with the review.

If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the
fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take
this ticket.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.

Comment 14 Mattia Verga 2020-11-07 14:28:25 UTC
Resetting ticket state.
Marcel, do you still want to package this? Can you provide updated spec and srpm?

Comment 15 Package Review 2020-12-08 00:45:51 UTC
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.