Firefox extension for signing with your eID on the web https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/webextension-token-signing/webextension-token-signing.spec https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/webextension-token-signing/webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-1.fc27.src.rpm
- Don't do that: # following line solves errors on debugsources %global debug_package %{nil} Instead make sure qmake use Fedora build flags: %prep %setup -q -n %{upstream_name}-%{version} sed -i "s|qmake|/usr/lib64/qt5/bin/qmake \ QMAKE_CFLAGS_DEBUG=\"${CFLAGS:--O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong -grecord-gcc-switches -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -mcet -fcf-protection }\" \ QMAKE_CFLAGS_RELEASE=\"${CFLAGS:--O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong -grecord-gcc-switches -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -mcet -fcf-protection }\" \ QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_DEBUG=\"${CXXFLAGS:--O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong -grecord-gcc-switches -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -mcet -fcf-protection }\" \ QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_RELEASE=\"${CXXFLAGS:--O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Werror=format-security -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -Wp,-D_GLIBCXX_ASSERTIONS -fexceptions -fstack-protector-strong -grecord-gcc-switches -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-cc1 -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-annobin-cc1 -m64 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -fstack-clash-protection -mcet -fcf-protection }\" \ QMAKE_LFLAGS_DEBUG=\"${LDFLAGS:--Wl,-z,relro -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld}\" \ QMAKE_LFLAGS_RELEASE=\"${LDFLAGS:--Wl,-z,relro -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld}\" \ QMAKE_STRIP=|" host-linux/GNUmakefile %build make %{?_smp_mflags} - mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 19, tab: line 10) Either use tabs or spacs, but not both. - Use either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, not both. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT Note: Using both %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#macros ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [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 (v2.1 or later)", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* LGPL (v2.1 or later)". 47 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/webextension-token- signing/review-webextension-token-signing/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/mozilla/extensions/{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384 }(firefox-nightly, firefox) [!]: %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 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 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]: 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). [?]: 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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro. [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 debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm webextension-token-signing-debuginfo-1.0.6-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm webextension-token-signing-debugsource-1.0.6-1.fc29.x86_64.rpm webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-1.fc29.src.rpm webextension-token-signing.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) eID -> ID, CID, e ID webextension-token-signing.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eID -> ID, CID, e ID webextension-token-signing.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib webextension-token-signing.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary chrome-token-signing webextension-token-signing-debugsource.x86_64: W: no-documentation webextension-token-signing.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) eID -> ID, CID, e ID webextension-token-signing.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eID -> ID, CID, e ID webextension-token-signing.src:19: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 19, tab: line 10) 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/webextension-token-signing/webextension-token-signing.spec https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/webextension-token-signing/webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-1.fc27.src.rpm Done everything (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #1) > [...] > %build > make %{?_smp_mflags} in the spec file I have %build export PATH=$PATH:%{_qt5_bindir} make %{?_smp_mflags} should I remove also line export PATH=$PATH:%{_qt5_bindir} ?
(In reply to Germano Massullo from comment #2) > https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/webextension-token-signing/ > webextension-token-signing.spec > > https://germano.fedorapeople.org/package_reviews/webextension-token-signing/ > webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-1.fc27.src.rpm > > > Done everything > > (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #1) > > [...] > > %build > > make %{?_smp_mflags} > > in the spec file I have > > %build > export PATH=$PATH:%{_qt5_bindir} > make %{?_smp_mflags} > > should I remove also line > export PATH=$PATH:%{_qt5_bindir} > ? Not needed since we're linking to the bin directly.
Okay thank you
IMHO if there is not anything else to correct, we could proceed
Package approved.
(fedrepo-req-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/webextension-token-signing
Hi Robert-André, it looks like we have some problems on non x86_64 architectures https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25424160
My bad, I used hardcoded flags. Replace the sed line with: sed -i "s|qmake|/usr/lib64/qt5/bin/qmake \ QMAKE_CFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_CFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_LFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%{?__global_ldflags}\" \ QMAKE_LFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%{?__global_ldflags}\" \ QMAKE_STRIP=|" host-linux/GNUmakefile
Build failed https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25522720 (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #9) > My bad, I used hardcoded flags. Replace the sed line with: > > sed -i "s|qmake|/usr/lib64/qt5/bin/qmake \ > QMAKE_CFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%optflags\" \ > QMAKE_CFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%optflags\" \ > QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%optflags\" \ > QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%optflags\" \ > QMAKE_LFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%{?__global_ldflags}\" \ > QMAKE_LFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%{?__global_ldflags}\" \ > QMAKE_STRIP=|" host-linux/GNUmakefile
Here's my fixed SPEC: # original upstream name: chrome-token-signing # it is a native messaging solution for firefox/chrome signing support # chrome and firefox dropped legacy npapi support form browsers # https://developer.chrome.com/apps/nativeMessaging # and Estonia ID card software now use native messaging to talk with smartcards # over javascript to create digital signatures. # Information source user zomps from #esteid Freenode IRC channel %global upstream_name chrome-token-signing Name: webextension-token-signing Version: 1.0.6 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Firefox extension for signing with your eID on the web License: LGPLv2+ URL: https://github.com/open-eid/chrome-token-signing Source0: %{url}/archive/v%{version}.tar.gz#/%{upstream_name}-%{version}.tar.gz BuildRequires: qt5-qtbase-devel BuildRequires: pkgconfig(openssl) BuildRequires: pkgconfig(libpcsclite) Requires: esteidcerts Requires: opensc%{?_isa} Requires: pcsc-lite%{?_isa} Requires: pcsc-lite-ccid%{?_isa} # mozilla-filesystem is required to install files into # %%_prefix/lib/mozilla and # %%{_datadir}/mozilla/extensions/ Requires: mozilla-filesystem %description Firefox extension for signing with your eID on the web %prep %setup -q -n %{upstream_name}-%{version} sed -i "s|qmake|%{_qt5_bindir}/qmake \ QMAKE_CFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_CFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_CXXFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%optflags\" \ QMAKE_LFLAGS_DEBUG=\"%{?__global_ldflags}\" \ QMAKE_LFLAGS_RELEASE=\"%{?__global_ldflags}\" \ QMAKE_STRIP=|" host-linux/GNUmakefile %build make %{?_smp_mflags} %install # make -C host-linux install DESTDIR=%%{buildroot} make -C host-linux install INSTALL_ROOT=%{buildroot} # Firefox is the browser installed by default on Fedora # Chrome is not available in Fedora repository, so # the following Chrome files will be removed rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/opt/google/chrome/extensions/ckjefchnfjhjfedoccjbhjpbncimppeg.json rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/opt/google/chrome/native-messaging-hosts/ee.ria.esteid.json rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/opt/chrome/extensions/ckjefchnfjhjfedoccjbhjpbncimppeg.json rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/opt/chrome/native-messaging-hosts/ee.ria.esteid.json %files %{_bindir}/chrome-token-signing # %%{_datadir} is a macro for /usr/share %{_datadir}/mozilla/extensions/* # %% dir creates a directory under a specific path %dir %_prefix/lib/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts/ # %%_prefix is a macro for /usr directory %_prefix/lib/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts/ee.ria.esteid.json %doc README.md AUTHORS RELEASE-NOTES.md %license LICENSE.LGPL %changelog * Thu Feb 22 2018 Germano Massullo <germano.massullo> - 1.0.6-1 - first release It builds in Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=25522841
My fault, I replaced %_prefix/lib/ with %{_libdir}
I need to add the QMAKE equivalent of cmake flag -DCMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR:PATH=%{_libdir}
(In reply to Germano Massullo from comment #13) > I need to add the QMAKE equivalent of cmake flag > -DCMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR:PATH=%{_libdir} Why? This is not needed at all.
Because on 64bit systems the package tries to install files under /usr/lib/... instead of /usr/lib64/... This can happen only for noarch packages, and this is not a noarch package.
Proof that the package needs the QMAKE equivalent of cmake flag -DCMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR:PATH=%{_libdir} https://github.com/open-eid/chrome-token-signing/issues/80#issuecomment-372034703
Some new infos https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/APKC62MK7GDMDSGIQ6LITVHH2IULK7KZ/
webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-4.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-6dcee533d9
webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-4.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1608d21400
webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-4.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-1608d21400
webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-4.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-6dcee533d9
webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-4.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
webextension-token-signing-1.0.6-4.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.