Bug 1334451 - Re-Review Request: certbot - A free, automated certificate authority client, renaming letsencrypt
Summary: Re-Review Request: certbot - A free, automated certificate authority client, ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jerry James
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1333539
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-05-09 16:03 UTC by James Hogarth
Modified: 2016-05-21 19:52 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-05-21 19:52:00 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
loganjerry: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description James Hogarth 2016-05-09 16:03:59 UTC
Spec URL: https://jhogarth.fedorapeople.org/certbot/certbot.spec
SRPM URL: https://jhogarth.fedorapeople.org/certbot/certbot-0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25.src.rpm

Description: This is a rename of the letsencrypt client which has had a rename upstream. The certbot client is a CLI utility to request and renew free certificates using the Let's Encrypt architecture.

For details of the upstream rename progress see here: https://github.com/certbot/certbot/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Arename

The request for us to rename this was raised as bz1333539

This is just a straight rename and does not involve any shim or redirection at this time, seeing as this is a beta service still I'd expect an administrator to change their scripts to call certbot instead.

Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13982727

The koji test build was against F23 due to broken pyOpenSSL (caused by updated python-cryptography) in F24/rawhide bz1334409

Fedora Account System Username: jhogarth

Comment 1 James Hogarth 2016-05-09 16:16:40 UTC
Re-run koji task after I noted a slip up in the python-acme requirement for the prerelease certbot:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=13982968

Comment 2 James Hogarth 2016-05-11 07:11:29 UTC
The pyOpenSSL 0.16 that fixes the python-cryptography api change is in place in f24/rawhide now.

Here's the rawhide build completing in koji:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14005701

Comment 3 Jerry James 2016-05-11 20:08:50 UTC
I will take this review.

Comment 4 James Hogarth 2016-05-11 20:12:43 UTC
(In reply to Jerry James from comment #3)
> I will take this review.

Thanks Jerry

As an FYI following the conference call I had with the CertBot guys this evening there's a couple of changes I need to make to the spec.

These will be made in the next 24 hours.

Comment 5 Jerry James 2016-05-11 21:53:16 UTC
Okay.  Since I went through the review process already anyway, I'll post what I've got, just in case it is helpful.

Issues
======
1. The patch has no explanatory comment (see
   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment).
   This is a SHOULD, not a MUST.

2. The main package Obsoletes is correct ("Obsoletes: letsencrypt < 0.6.0"),
   but the subpackage uses "<=" instead of "<", which is not correct.  See the
   self-obsoletion rpmlint warning.

3. Does this package manage its own log files?  See the
   log-files-without-logrotate rpmlint warning.


Package Review
==============

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



===== 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 256 files have
     unknown license.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[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 20480 bytes in 3 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]: Package installs properly.
[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

Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
     provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     python2-certbot
     That's okay; the dependency goes the other direction.
[?]: 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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: 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]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

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

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: certbot-0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25.noarch.rpm
          python2-certbot-0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25.noarch.rpm
          certbot-0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25.src.rpm
certbot.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/certbot 0
certbot.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/certbot 0
certbot.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/certbot 0
certbot.noarch: W: log-files-without-logrotate ['/var/log/certbot']
python2-certbot.noarch: W: self-obsoletion python-letsencrypt <= 0.6.0 obsoletes python-letsencrypt = 0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25
python2-certbot.noarch: W: self-obsoletion python2-letsencrypt <= 0.6.0 obsoletes python2-letsencrypt = 0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25
python2-certbot.noarch: W: no-documentation
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/live/sample-renewal/cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/archive/sample-renewal/fullchain1.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/archive/sample-renewal/chain1.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/dsa_cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/archive/sample-renewal/cert1.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/live/sample-renewal/fullchain.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/matching_cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/cert-san.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/live/sample-renewal/chain.pem
certbot.src:65: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 15 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
python2-certbot.noarch: W: self-obsoletion python-letsencrypt <= 0.6.0 obsoletes python-letsencrypt = 0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25
python2-certbot.noarch: W: self-obsoletion python2-letsencrypt <= 0.6.0 obsoletes python2-letsencrypt = 0.6.0-0.0dev0git38d7503.fc25
python2-certbot.noarch: W: no-documentation
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/cert-san.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/archive/sample-renewal/chain1.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/archive/sample-renewal/fullchain1.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/live/sample-renewal/cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/live/sample-renewal/chain.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/dsa_cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/matching_cert.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/archive/sample-renewal/cert1.pem
python2-certbot.noarch: W: pem-certificate /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/certbot/tests/testdata/live/sample-renewal/fullchain.pem
certbot.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/certbot 0
certbot.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/certbot 0
certbot.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/certbot 0
certbot.noarch: W: log-files-without-logrotate ['/var/log/certbot']
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 14 warnings.



Requires
--------
python2-certbot (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python-configobj
    python-mock
    python-parsedatetime
    python-psutil
    python-zope-component
    python-zope-interface
    python2-acme
    python2-configargparse
    python2-dialog

certbot (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python2
    python2-certbot



Provides
--------
python2-certbot:
    python-certbot
    python-letsencrypt
    python2-certbot
    python2-letsencrypt

certbot:
    certbot
    letsencrypt



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/certbot/certbot/archive/38d7503.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 90a352781cffacfdc030366b47cc4b9a8aaf59650949be351792b0e1e8e151f9
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 90a352781cffacfdc030366b47cc4b9a8aaf59650949be351792b0e1e8e151f9


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1334451 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Comment 6 James Hogarth 2016-05-12 15:10:56 UTC
Update with review issues and details from conference:

1) Comment added about patch
2) Fixed the incorrect <= in obsoletes of subpackage
3) Dropped the /var/log %files - as per the original LE review not having this
4) Added symlink from /usr/bin/letsencrypt to /usr/bin/certbot at request of upstream on call for compatibility with old scripts (arguments are compatible).
5) The certbot command uses the old letsencrypt directories still for compatibility so use these in files.

This has been updated to the latest git head as well as something as close as possible to the impending 0.6.0 release and switch over.

New rawhide koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14027170

New F23 koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14027165

This F23 build was used to generate the certificate via the webroot method just now for https://www.hogarthuk.com/

Spec URL: https://jhogarth.fedorapeople.org/certbot/certbot.spec
SRPM URL: https://jhogarth.fedorapeople.org/certbot/certbot-0.6.0-1.0dev0git41f347d.fc25.src.rpm

Comment 7 Jerry James 2016-05-12 16:48:41 UTC
Looks good.  This package is APPROVED.

Comment 8 James Hogarth 2016-05-21 19:52:00 UTC
This is now stable


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.