Bug 1879482 (rust-pkcs11) - Review Request: rust-pkcs11 - Rust PKCS#11 Library
Summary: Review Request: rust-pkcs11 - Rust PKCS#11 Library
Alias: rust-pkcs11
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jared Smith
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
Blocks: PARSEC 1878923
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2020-09-16 11:47 UTC by Peter Robinson
Modified: 2020-09-16 14:13 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2020-09-16 14:13:16 UTC
Type: Bug
jsmith.fedora: fedora-review+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 1 Jared Smith 2020-09-16 13:40:20 UTC
Package is 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
[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", "*No copyright*
     Apache License 2.0". 8 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /tmp/1879482-rust-pkcs11/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.
[x]: 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.
[x]: 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 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]: 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
[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 rust-
     pkcs11-devel , rust-pkcs11+default-devel
[x]: 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
[-]: 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]: %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 all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.

Checking: rust-pkcs11-devel-0.5.0-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
rust-pkcs11-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/pkcs11 HTTP Error 404: Not Found
rust-pkcs11-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/cargo/registry/pkcs11-0.5.0/.cargo-checksum.json
rust-pkcs11+default-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/pkcs11 HTTP Error 404: Not Found
rust-pkcs11+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-pkcs11.src: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/pkcs11 HTTP Error 404: Not Found
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
rust-pkcs11-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/pkcs11 <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
rust-pkcs11-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/cargo/registry/pkcs11-0.5.0/.cargo-checksum.json
rust-pkcs11+default-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/pkcs11 <urlopen error [Errno -3] Temporary failure in name resolution>
rust-pkcs11+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.

Source checksums
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/pkcs11/0.5.0/download#/pkcs11-0.5.0.crate :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 3aca6d67e4c8613bfe455599d0233d00735f85df2001f6bfd9bb7ac0496b10af
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3aca6d67e4c8613bfe455599d0233d00735f85df2001f6bfd9bb7ac0496b10af

rust-pkcs11-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(libloading/default) >= 0.6.0 with crate(libloading/default) < 0.7.0)
    (crate(num-bigint/default) >= 0.3.0 with crate(num-bigint/default) < 0.4.0)

rust-pkcs11+default-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1879482
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Python, PHP, Ocaml, Perl, fonts, SugarActivity, C/C++, R, Haskell, Java

Comment 2 Gwyn Ciesla 2020-09-16 13:48:26 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-pkcs11

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