Bug 1718339 - Review Request: gnome-passwordsafe - password manager which makes use of the KeePass v.4 format and integrates perfectly with the GNOME desktop
Summary: Review Request: gnome-passwordsafe - password manager which makes use of the ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin 🐧
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-06-07 14:01 UTC by Pavlo Rudyi
Modified: 2019-10-04 20:04 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-10-04 20:04:42 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
eclipseo: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Pavlo Rudyi 2019-06-07 14:01:22 UTC
Spec URL: https://gist.github.com/paulcarroty/5cceff6b0abf8b55c73c9e5cb5145213
SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/paulcarroty/gnome-passwordsafe/fedora-30-x86_64/00928143-gnome-passwordsafe/gnome-passwordsafe-3.32.0-0.src.rpm
Description: https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/PasswordSafe

Work still in progress, here's the fully working bundled version: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/paulcarroty/gnome-passwordsafe/

Dependencies which are not available in Fedora yet: construct, cffi, argon2-cffi, pycryptodome, future, pykeepass. Any help will be appreciated.

Fedora Account System Username: paulcarroty

Comment 1 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2019-06-07 20:53:35 UTC
Well you need to package the missing deps. python-future, python-construct, python-cffi are already packaged: if you haven't found them, you're doing something wrong.

You need to package argon2-cffi, pycryptodome and pykeepass, just use pyp2rpm -b3 $pypiname for this.


Use python3dist for your deps. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_automatic_provides_with_a_standardized_name

Comment 2 Pavlo Rudyi 2019-06-08 14:03:38 UTC
Thx, done. 

python-construct 2.9.45-1.fc31 is needed too.

Comment 3 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2019-06-12 15:28:17 UTC
(In reply to Pavlo Rudyi from comment #2)
> Thx, done. 
> 
> python-construct 2.9.45-1.fc31 is needed too.

You need to open a Review Request for each new package. I can't review the deps in this review.

Comment 5 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2019-06-13 17:56:46 UTC
 - No:

%global debug_package %{nil}

If %debuginfo are not generated, you must find out why and fix it. Actually they are generated so it's not needed.

 - Group: is not used in Fedora

 - No:

/usr/share/locale/

 If you're using %find_lang, it's to use the resulting .lang file:

%files -f passwordsafe.lang

 - Not needed:

%dir %{_datadir}/metainfo

 - Missing a % here:

Release:        1%{?dist}

 - License field is invalid, it should be:

License: GPLv3+

 - Split the description to stay under 80 characters per line:

gnome-passwordsafe.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C It integrates with the GNOME desktop and provides an interface for the management of password databases.

 - Check your use of tabs and spaces:

gnome-passwordsafe.src:68: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 17, tab: line 68)




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

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



===== 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". 94 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/gnome-
     passwordsafe/review-gnome-passwordsafe/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or
     desktop-file-validate if there is such a file.
[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.
[x]: 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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== 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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
     Note: %define requiring justification: %define appname PasswordSafe,
     %define appid org.gnome.PasswordSafe
[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.

===== 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: gnome-passwordsafe-3.32.0-1.fc31.noarch.rpm
          gnome-passwordsafe-3.32.0-1.fc31.src.rpm
gnome-passwordsafe.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C It integrates with the GNOME desktop and provides an interface for the management of password databases.
gnome-passwordsafe.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag
gnome-passwordsafe.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL-3.0-or-later
gnome-passwordsafe.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-passwordsafe
gnome-passwordsafe.src: E: description-line-too-long C It integrates with the GNOME desktop and provides an interface for the management of password databases.
gnome-passwordsafe.src: E: no-changelogname-tag
gnome-passwordsafe.src: W: invalid-license GPL-3.0-or-later
gnome-passwordsafe.src:68: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 17, tab: line 68)
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 4 warnings.

Comment 7 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2019-06-14 14:47:15 UTC
 - Your changelog entry must include Version-Release info:

* Fri Jun 14 2019 Pavlo Rudyi <paulcarroty> - 3.32-1


Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue before import.

Comment 8 Pavlo Rudyi 2019-06-14 15:49:12 UTC
Done.

Comment 10 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2019-09-22 15:47:33 UTC
Refreshing flag.

Comment 11 Gwyn Ciesla 2019-09-23 13:10:28 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gnome-passwordsafe

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2019-09-25 20:29:28 UTC
FEDORA-2019-5fc014f121 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-5fc014f121

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2019-09-25 20:52:14 UTC
FEDORA-2019-a4b1ebe9a5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-a4b1ebe9a5

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2019-09-26 02:48:33 UTC
gnome-passwordsafe-3.32.0-2.fc30, python-argon2-cffi-19.1.0-1.fc30, python-pykeepass-3.0.3-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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-2019-a4b1ebe9a5

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2019-09-26 02:56:23 UTC
gnome-passwordsafe-3.32.0-2.fc31, python-argon2-cffi-19.1.0-1.fc31, python-pykeepass-3.0.3-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 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-2019-5fc014f121

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2019-10-04 20:04:42 UTC
gnome-passwordsafe-3.32.0-2.fc31, python-argon2-cffi-19.1.0-1.fc31, python-pykeepass-3.0.3-2.fc31 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 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.