Bug 1590921 - Review Request: restic - Fast, secure, efficient backup program
Summary: Review Request: restic - Fast, secure, efficient backup program
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin 🐧
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On: 1592074 1592448 1592457 1592476 1592482 1604235
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2018-06-13 16:22 UTC by Steve Miller
Modified: 2018-08-24 08:04 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2018-08-24 08:04:22 UTC
Type: ---
zebob.m: fedora-review+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Steve Miller 2018-06-13 16:22:27 UTC
Spec URL: https://github.com/copart/restic-rpm/blob/master/SPECS/restic.spec
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/copart/restic/fedora-27-x86_64/00765617-restic/restic-0.9.1-1.fc27.src.rpm
Description: restic is a backup program that is fast, efficient and secure.
Fedora Account System Username: copart

copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/copart/restic/
koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27596143

This is my first package and will NEED a SPONSOR.  I have been maintaining this package in copr for a few months now.  My package was written about twice in Fedora Mangizone. https://fedoramagazine.org/use-restic-encrypted-backups/ and https://fedoramagazine.org/4-cool-copr-february-2018/.

Comment 1 Steve Miller 2018-06-13 20:12:57 UTC
Successful koji build task:

I had to remove the ppc64 architecture due to go/golang incompatibility.

Comment 2 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-06-13 21:00:51 UTC
 - Take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/More_Go_packaging to package Go apps

 - You need to unbundle vendor/ first, which implies packaging several libraries. Use gofed to help you (install and use the version from updates-testing if you're on F27).

 -Shouldn't be necessary:

%define debug_package %{nil}

 - Don't do that:

#Gzip man pages
/usr/bin/gzip %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/doc/man/*

  Compressing man pages is handled by the packaging process

 - Don't put .gz as the compression can change in the future:


 - Don't mark man pages as doc

 - Own the directories you create with %dir:

%dir %{_datadir}/zsh/site-functions
%dir %{_datadir}/bash-completion/
%dir %{_datadir}/bash-completion/completions

 - Don't install doc that way, just use %doc directly with the files:

%files devel -f devel.file-list
%license LICENSE

 - Don't install from %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/ : when you are in %build or %install, you are in the folder where the archive has been extracted, so you have access directly to the files you wanna install.

Here's a sample I've created based on the Gofed output. I have not tested it.

# https://github.com/restic/restic
%global goipath         github.com/restic/restic
Version:                0.9.1


Name:           restic
Release:        1%{?dist}
Summary:        Fast, secure, efficient backup program
License:        BSD
URL:            %{gourl}
Source0:        %{gosource}

BuildRequires: golang(bazil.org/fuse)
BuildRequires: golang(bazil.org/fuse/fs)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-go/storage)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/cenkalti/backoff)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/elithrar/simple-scrypt)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/google/go-cmp/cmp)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/juju/ratelimit)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/kurin/blazer/b2)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/mattn/go-isatty)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/minio/minio-go)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/minio/minio-go/pkg/credentials)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/ncw/swift)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/pkg/errors)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/pkg/sftp)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/pkg/xattr)
BuildRequires: golang(github.com/restic/chunker)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/crypto/poly1305)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/crypto/scrypt)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/crypto/ssh/terminal)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/net/context)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/net/context/ctxhttp)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/net/http2)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/oauth2/google)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/sync/errgroup)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/sys/unix)
BuildRequires: golang(golang.org/x/text/encoding/unicode)
BuildRequires: golang(google.golang.org/api/googleapi)
BuildRequires: golang(google.golang.org/api/storage/v1)
BuildRequires: golang(gopkg.in/tomb.v2)


%gosetup -q

%gobuild -o _bin/%{name} %{goipath}

mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datarootdir}/zsh/site-functions
mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_datarootdir}/bash-completion/completions
install -p -m 755 _bin/%{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
install -p -m 644 doc/man/* %{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/
#zsh completion
install -p -m 644 doc/zsh-completion.zsh %{buildroot}%{_datarootdir}/zsh/site-functions/_restic
#Bash completion
install -p -m 644 doc/bash-completion.sh %{buildroot}%{_datarootdir}/bash-completion/completions/restic


%files devel -f devel.file-list
%license LICENSE
%dir %{_datadir}/zsh/site-functions
%dir %{_datadir}/bash-completion/
%dir %{_datadir}/bash-completion/completions

* Wed Jun 13 2018 Steve Miller <copart@gmail.com> - 0.9.1-1
- First package for Fedora

 - You can look at: https://eclipseo.fedorapeople.org/golang/ for more examples if you need help packaging the dependencies.
  Search on https://src.fedoraproject.org/ to see what dependencies are already packaged and which one are missing.
  I suggest trying to build all deps within your COPR and see if restic builds then. 

Don't hesitate to contact me for help on my email.

Comment 3 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-06-13 21:02:11 UTC
Also I'm not able to sponsor, try introducing yourself to the devel mailing list and do some informal reviews to show that you understand the guidelines

Comment 4 Jason Tibbitts 2018-06-13 21:26:52 UTC
You don't have to be a sponsor to approve a review ticket from someone who needs a sponsor.  See the end of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group#Submitting_quality_new_packages

Comment 5 Steve Miller 2018-06-15 20:31:14 UTC
I now have the build working in Copr with the information/help provided by  Robert-André.

I created FIVE new packages that restic depends on that are not already in the repos.  These five new packages do not build in EPEL since the new Go macros are not available yet.


All spec files:

Packages in Copr:

I cannot test building restic in koji due to the dependencies.

I am open to ALL feedback.  Thank you to all those that already responded to this request!

Comment 6 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-06-15 20:51:35 UTC
Each SPEC requires their own review request. File a bug for each.

Quick notes though:


→ split the description to stay below 80 characters per line
→ Version: 1.3.0 should be after goipath and before %gometa


→ %gochecks probably won't work as there is no internet access when building from within Koji or Mock

Comment 7 Steve Miller 2018-06-18 15:52:15 UTC
Robert-André I added review requests for all dependencies.  I also update the SPECs as you suggested.  Thank you!

Comment 8 Steve Miller 2018-06-24 18:27:51 UTC
Updated SPEC and SRPM
Spec URL: https://copart.fedorapeople.org/restic/restic.spec
SRPM URL: https://copart.fedorapeople.org/restic/restic-0.9.1-2.fc29.src.rpm
koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=27838154

ALL dependencies are now available in rawhide and this package builds.  Therefore, I believe this is ready for review.

Comment 9 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-06-25 10:19:19 UTC
 - Add a new line between each changelog entries

 - rm -rf vendor in %prep

 - build fails, probably because of:

BUILDSTDERR: # github.com/restic/restic/internal/backend
BUILDSTDERR: internal/backend/backend_retry.go:37:23: undefined: backoff.WithMaxRetries

WithMaxRetries was added in version 2.0.0 of golang-github-cenkalti-backoff, latest version packaged in Fedora is 1.1.0. The problem wasn't apparent because you didn't remove vendor.

I'll see if I can do a PR to update it and get back to you.

Comment 11 Steve Miller 2018-06-27 20:59:56 UTC
Dependency golang-github-pkg-sftp requires a bump with upstream to support restic.  Submitted a PR to update it.

The restic package needs an update to use WithMaxRetries

PR: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/golang-github-pkg-sftp/pull-request/1

Comment 12 Steve Miller 2018-07-28 18:25:21 UTC
Updated SPEC and SRPM
Spec URL: https://copart.fedorapeople.org/restic/restic.spec
SRPM URL: https://copart.fedorapeople.org/restic/restic-0.9.1-2.fc29.src.rpm
koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=28665487

ALL dependencies are now available in rawhide, vendor folder is removed, and this package builds.  Therefore, I believe this is ready for review.

Comment 13 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2018-07-28 18:52:07 UTC
 - Add OFL to the license list for the provided Lemon font, and add a comment explaining the license breakdown.

Package otherwise approved.

Package Review

[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

===== MUST items =====

[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "BSD (2 clause)", "SIL (v1.1)", "Unknown or generated". 569
     files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
[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/bash-
     completion(nnn, falkon, cmake-data, fedpkg, unar, kmod, dnf, libmbim,
     ripgrep, subversion, python3-pip, git-core, rfpkg, rpmdevtools,
     ModemManager, libqmi, bash-completion, fd-find, licensecheck,
     bubblewrap, exa, mtr, mercurial, python2-pip, rpmlint, yum,
     filesystem, flatpak, glib2), /usr/share/zsh/site-functions(nnn, fd-
     find, exa, mercurial, ddgr, pulseaudio, ripgrep, flatpak, googler,
     imgp, curl, fzf), /usr/share/bash-completion/completions(nnn, falkon,
     cmake-data, fedpkg, unar, kmod, dnf, libmbim, ripgrep, subversion,
     python3-pip, tig, git-core, rfpkg, rpmdevtools, ModemManager, libqmi,
     bash-completion, fd-find, licensecheck, bubblewrap, exa, mtr,
     mercurial, python2-pip, firewalld, libappstream-glib, rpmlint, yum,
     filesystem, flatpak, glib2)
[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
[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 81920 bytes in 4 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 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
[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
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

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

[-]: 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 restic-
     debuginfo , restic-debugsource
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
[-]: 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
[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
[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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

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

[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.

Checking: restic-0.9.1-2.fc29.x86_64.rpm
restic.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rclone -> clone, r clone
restic.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US rclone -> clone, r clone
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Rpmlint (debuginfo)
Checking: restic-debuginfo-0.9.1-2.fc29.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Comment 14 Steve Miller 2018-07-29 10:56:06 UTC
provided Lemon font is not in rpm binary, only in upstreams tarbar, therefore, update to LICENSE is not needed.

Comment 15 Igor Raits 2018-07-29 13:38:59 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  Do not repeat package name in summary

Comment 17 Igor Raits 2018-07-29 14:08:20 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/restic

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2018-08-16 00:01:27 UTC
restic-0.9.2-1.fc28 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 28. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2018-d7d48f43e1

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2018-08-16 15:24:50 UTC
restic-0.9.2-1.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-d7d48f43e1

Comment 20 Fedora Update System 2018-08-24 08:04:22 UTC
restic-0.9.2-1.fc28 has been pushed to the Fedora 28 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

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