RDO tickets are now tracked in Jira https://issues.redhat.com/projects/RDO/issues/
Bug 1708607 - Package review: puppet-rsyslog
Summary: Package review: puppet-rsyslog
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: RDO
Classification: Community
Component: Package Review
Version: trunk
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: trunk
Assignee: Javier Peña
QA Contact: hguemar
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: RDO-TRAIN
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-05-10 10:54 UTC by Martin Magr
Modified: 2020-07-31 14:44 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-07-31 14:44:22 UTC
Embargoed:
jpena: rdo-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
RPM spec file (1.39 KB, text/x-matlab)
2019-06-07 10:20 UTC, Martin Magr
no flags Details


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
RDO 20625 0 None None None 2019-05-10 11:04:29 UTC
RDO 21069 0 None None None 2019-06-07 10:38:39 UTC
RDO 21073 0 None None None 2019-06-07 14:51:52 UTC

Description Martin Magr 2019-05-10 10:54:40 UTC
Description of problem:


Add puppet-rsyslog package in RDO, it's required for rsyslogd configuration possibilities. rsyslogd is a substitute for fluentd, which is deprecated and will be removed in train.

Source:- https://github.com/voxpupuli/puppet-rsyslog

Comment 1 Martin Magr 2019-05-10 11:08:21 UTC
I tried to generate the spec file but opm-spec-create fails for me:

(.venv-opm-toolbox) [para@sanitarium opm-toolbox]$ python opm-spec-create.py -h
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "opm-spec-create.py", line 29, in <module>
    from rdopkg.repoman import RepoManager
ImportError: No module named repoman
(.venv-opm-toolbox) [para@sanitarium opm-toolbox]$

Comment 2 Javier Peña 2019-05-10 14:48:04 UTC
Initial licensecheck output:

$ licensecheck -r . |grep -v UNKNOWN
./LICENSE: Apache License (v2.0)

The Puppet module is licensed using the ASL 2.0 license.

About the spec file, I'm now sure if opm-spec-create.py is still valid. However, it should be pretty easy to create it from another puppet spec.

Comment 3 Martin Magr 2019-05-10 20:06:06 UTC
Ack, will create it manually then.

Comment 4 Martin Magr 2019-06-07 10:20:09 UTC
Created attachment 1578288 [details]
RPM spec file

Comment 5 Martin Magr 2019-06-07 10:21:28 UTC
Sorry for late creation. This fall of my radar a bit. Javier, is there anything else left for me to do to get this package to RDO?

Comment 6 Javier Peña 2019-06-07 13:30:00 UTC
The spec has been created from a puppet template in RDO. That explains the absence of a LICENSE file.

Since the SRPM used to run fedora-review was generated by DLRN, the Source0 line is automatically created.

The package is approved.


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

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


Issues:
=======
- 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.
  Note: License file LICENSE is not marked as %license
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text


===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "Apache License (v2.0)". 97 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/puppet-
     rsyslog/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/share/openstack-puppet/modules,
     /usr/share/openstack-puppet
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/openstack-
     puppet/modules, /usr/share/openstack-puppet
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
     Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
     Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: 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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
     Note: %define requiring justification: %define upstream_version
     3.3.1-rc0, %define upstream_name puppet-rsyslog
[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]: SourceX is a working URL.

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

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: puppet-rsyslog-3.3.1-0.20190607112318.d42f3dc.el7.noarch.rpm
          puppet-rsyslog-3.3.1-0.20190607112318.d42f3dc.el7.src.rpm
puppet-rsyslog.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency puppet-stdlib
puppet-rsyslog.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag
puppet-rsyslog.noarch: W: no-documentation
puppet-rsyslog.src: E: no-changelogname-tag
puppet-rsyslog.src: W: invalid-url Source0: 3.3.1-0.20190607112318.d42f3dc.tar.gz
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 2 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
puppet-rsyslog.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency puppet-stdlib
puppet-rsyslog.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag
puppet-rsyslog.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/voxpupuli/puppet-rsyslog <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
puppet-rsyslog.noarch: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings.



Requires
--------
puppet-rsyslog (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    puppet
    puppet-concat
    puppet-stdlib



Provides
--------
puppet-rsyslog:
    puppet-rsyslog



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.2 (65d36bb) last change: 2019-04-09
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -r -n puppet-rsyslog -m dlrn
Buildroot used: dlrn-centos7-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Haskell, SugarActivity, R, Perl, fonts, Python, C/C++, Ocaml, Java, PHP
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 7 Yatin Karel 2020-07-31 14:44:22 UTC
puppet-rsyslog available in RDO since Train release, closing it.


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