Spec URL: https://nux.se/repo/mod_authn_otp/mod_authn_otp.spec SRPM URL: https://nux.se/repo/mod_authn_otp/mod_authn_otp-1.1.9-1.fc32.src.rpm Description: One-time password authentication for apache Fedora Account System Username: oden
Taking this review.
> %{!?_httpd_apxs: %{expand: %%global _httpd_apxs %%{_sbindir}/apxs}} > %{!?_httpd_mmn: %{expand: %%global _httpd_mmn %%(cat %{_includedir}/httpd/.mmn || echo 0-0)}} These don't seem to be needed, they are defined and provided by the httpd-devel package, could you please remove them? > Source0: https://github.com/downloads/archiecobbs/mod-authn-otp/mod-authn-otp-%{version}.tar.gz This URL is not valid. It seems something like works: > Source0: %{url}/archive/%{version}/mod-authn-otp-%{version}.tar.gz > %setup -q -n mod-authn-otp-%{version} Please consider using "%autosetup -n mod-authn-otp-%{version}" > make %{?_smp_mflags} CFLAGS="%{optflags} -fPIE" Please use '%make_build' in place of "make %{?_smp_mflags}", and instead of "%{optflags}", please consider using "%{build_cflags}". > %doc CHANGES LICENSE README* users.sample Please break out "LICENSE" to %license, like so: > %doc CHANGES README* users.sample > %license LICENSE
Thanks Neal, I applied those changes.
(In reply to Oden Eriksson from comment #3) > Thanks Neal, I applied those changes. Can you post updated Spec and SRPM links?
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4) > (In reply to Oden Eriksson from comment #3) > > Thanks Neal, I applied those changes. > > Can you post updated Spec and SRPM links? Yes, same as before. As in the description.
This package does not build because it's missing "BuildRequires: gcc" and "BuildRequires: make". Please add those. :)
I think these BR are pulled in by rpm-build ?
I was wrong. The BR is fixed now, same URL.
> BuildRequires: gcc make autoconf automake I generally recommend that you make this one per line, to be nice with git diff, but I'm not going to make you change it.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [-]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [-]: 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: "Unknown or generated", "Apache License 2.0", "Expat License". 9 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ngompa/1847058-mod_authn_otp/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [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 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 20480 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 must own all directories that it creates. [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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified. [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]: No %config files under /usr. [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: [x]: 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. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: 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. [?]: 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]: 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: [!]: Package should not use obsolete m4 macros Note: Some obsoleted macros found, see the attachment. See: https://fedorahosted.org/FedoraReview/wiki/AutoTools [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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: mod_authn_otp-1.1.9-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm mod_authn_otp-debuginfo-1.1.9-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm mod_authn_otp-debugsource-1.1.9-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm mod_authn_otp-1.1.9-1.fc33.src.rpm mod_authn_otp.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) apache -> Apache, apace, panache mod_authn_otp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) apache -> Apache, apace, panache mod_authn_otp.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp.src: E: specfile-error warning: line 14: Possible unexpanded macro in: Requires: httpd-mmn = %{_httpd_mmn} 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 14 warnings. Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: mod_authn_otp-debuginfo-1.1.9-1.fc33.x86_64.rpm mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb backend. warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb backend. mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/archiecobbs/mod-authn-otp <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb backend. mod_authn_otp.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) apache -> Apache, apace, panache mod_authn_otp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/archiecobbs/mod-authn-otp <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> warning: Found bdb Packages database while attempting sqlite backend: using bdb backend. mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US authn -> autobahn mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US otp -> top, opt, op mod_authn_otp-debugsource.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/archiecobbs/mod-authn-otp <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 14 warnings. Unversioned so-files -------------------- mod_authn_otp: /usr/lib64/httpd/modules/mod_authn_otp.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/archiecobbs/mod-authn-otp/archive/1.1.9/mod-authn-otp-1.1.9.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 4054ad999fa32258c9fab83333c16a60733818c399342644cdc0ff1d6b8d7c0a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 4054ad999fa32258c9fab83333c16a60733818c399342644cdc0ff1d6b8d7c0a Requires -------- mod_authn_otp (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): config(mod_authn_otp) httpd httpd-mmn libc.so.6()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1()(64bit) libcrypto.so.1.1(OPENSSL_1_1_0)(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) mod_authn_otp-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): mod_authn_otp-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- mod_authn_otp: config(mod_authn_otp) mod_authn_otp mod_authn_otp(x86-64) mod_authn_otp-debuginfo: debuginfo(build-id) mod_authn_otp-debuginfo mod_authn_otp-debuginfo(x86-64) mod_authn_otp-debugsource: mod_authn_otp-debugsource mod_authn_otp-debugsource(x86-64) AutoTools: Obsoleted m4s found ------------------------------ AM_CONFIG_HEADER found in: mod-authn-otp-1.1.9/configure.ac:72 Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1847058 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic Disabled plugins: Python, PHP, Java, SugarActivity, Haskell, Ocaml, fonts, R, Perl Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Based on the review, I think this is good to go!
I've sponsored you as a packager, as I've seen your work in Mageia and CentOS stuff and know you're very good at this. Congratulations on becoming a Fedora packager and welcome to the Fedora community! You can proceed to the next step in the package inclusion process. :)
Thank you Neal!
configure:3979: checking for EVP_sha1 in -lcrypto configure:4004: gcc -o conftest -O3 -Wall -Waggregate-return -Wcast-align -Wchar-subscripts -Wcomment -Wformat -Wimplicit -Wmissing-declarations -Wmissing-prototypes -Wnested-externs -Wno-long-long -Wparentheses -Wpointer-arith -Wredundant-decls -Wreturn-type -Wswitch -Wtrigraphs -Wuninitialized -Wunused -Wwrite-strings -Wshadow -Wstrict-prototypes -Wcast-qual -Wl,-z,relro -Wl,--as-needed -Wl,-z,now -specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-hardened-ld conftest.c -lcrypto >&5 conftest.c:18:1: warning: function declaration isn't a prototype [-Wstrict-prototypes] 18 | char EVP_sha1 (); | ^~~~ conftest.c:20:1: warning: function declaration isn't a prototype [-Wstrict-prototypes] 20 | main () | ^~~~ /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccamYXmz.o: `EVP_sha1@@OPENSSL_1_1_0' non-PLT reloc for symbol defined in shared library and accessed from executable (rebuild file with -fPIC ?) /usr/bin/ld: final link failed: bad value collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status ^^^ is the reason for build failing on s390x, the project's build-system doesn't use the distro-wide compiler flags, thus -fPIC is missing and the check fails
Package never imported, resetting ticket status (it will need a fresh review to create the repository). Oden, what's the status? Are you still interested in packaging this in Fedora?
(In reply to Mattia Verga from comment #15) > Package never imported, resetting ticket status (it will need a fresh review > to create the repository). > > Oden, what's the status? Are you still interested in packaging this in > Fedora? Hi, I'm sorry to say I lost interest in this particular software. It's free for anyone to adopt.
Closing as DEADREVIEW, then.