Bug 1897795 - Review Request: rust-ctr - CTR block mode of operation
Summary: Review Request: rust-ctr - CTR block mode of operation
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jerry James
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
Blocks: 1897796
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2020-11-14 15:21 UTC by Fabio Valentini
Modified: 2020-11-30 17:03 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2020-11-30 17:03:28 UTC
Type: ---
loganjerry: fedora-review+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Fabio Valentini 2020-11-14 15:21:27 UTC
Spec URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-ctr.spec
SRPM URL: https://decathorpe.fedorapeople.org/packages/rust-ctr-0.6.0-1.fc33.src.rpm

CTR block mode of operation

Fedora Account System Username: decathorpe

Note that this package requires a yet-to-be-pushed update to rust-aes 0.6.0, and requires (and is required for) a coordinated update of 17 packages. Builds are available in COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/decathorpe/RustCrypto-updates/monitor/

Comment 1 Jerry James 2020-11-28 15:43:36 UTC
I will take this review.

Comment 2 Jerry James 2020-11-28 16:53:29 UTC
This package is APPROVED.

Package Review

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

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

[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
[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.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[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.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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 =====

[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[?]: 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.
[x]: 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
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
[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]: 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-ctr-devel-0.6.0-1.fc34.noarch.rpm
rust-ctr-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/ctr HTTP Error 404: Not Found
rust-ctr-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/cargo/registry/ctr-0.6.0/.cargo-checksum.json
rust-ctr+default-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/ctr HTTP Error 404: Not Found
rust-ctr+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
rust-ctr.src: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/ctr HTTP Error 404: Not Found
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.

Rpmlint (installed packages)
rust-ctr-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/ctr HTTP Error 404: Not Found
rust-ctr-devel.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/cargo/registry/ctr-0.6.0/.cargo-checksum.json
rust-ctr+default-devel.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://crates.io/crates/ctr HTTP Error 404: Not Found
rust-ctr+default-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.

Source checksums
https://crates.io/api/v1/crates/ctr/0.6.0/download#/ctr-0.6.0.crate :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : fb4a30d54f7443bf3d6191dcd486aca19e67cb3c49fa7a06a319966346707e7f
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : fb4a30d54f7443bf3d6191dcd486aca19e67cb3c49fa7a06a319966346707e7f

rust-ctr-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (crate(cipher/default) >= 0.2.0 with crate(cipher/default) < 0.3.0)

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



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --copr-build https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/decathorpe/RustCrypto-updates/build/1769077/ -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: C/C++, Haskell, Python, Java, fonts, R, PHP, Ocaml, Ruby, SugarActivity, Perl

Comment 3 Fabio Valentini 2020-11-28 17:14:29 UTC
Thanks a lot for the review!

Comment 4 Gwyn Ciesla 2020-11-30 14:36:21 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rust-ctr

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2020-11-30 17:03:28 UTC
FEDORA-2020-0fe6c978c5 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, 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.