Bug 2109939 - Review Request: mitmproxy - Interactive SSL-capable intercepting HTTP proxy
Summary: Review Request: mitmproxy - Interactive SSL-capable intercepting HTTP proxy
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2048162
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-07-22 13:55 UTC by Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
Modified: 2024-10-04 06:39 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
root.log (200.59 KB, text/plain)
2023-01-18 18:58 UTC, Petr Menšík
no flags Details
build.log (25.45 KB, text/plain)
2023-01-18 18:58 UTC, Petr Menšík
no flags Details

Description Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2022-07-22 13:55:25 UTC
Spec URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/mitmproxy/mitmproxy.spec
SRPM URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/mitmproxy/mitmproxy-8.1.1-1.fc36.src.rpm
Description:
mitmproxy is an interactive, SSL-capable man-in-the-middle proxy for HTTP with
a console interface.

mitmdump is the command-line version of mitmproxy. Think tcpdump for HTTP.

libmproxy is the library that mitmproxy and mitmdump are built on.

Fedora Account System Username: rathann

Previous attempt by Fabian Affolter: bug 1198760.

Comment 1 Petr Menšík 2023-01-18 18:56:57 UTC
The current spec failed to build to me when trying fedora-review -b 2109939. I admit I have trouble finding what exactly is reponsible for the failure.

I think the package should Provides: python3-%{name}, as recommended by python guidelines.

I think the main issue reported in root.log:

DEBUG util.py:443:  Error: 
DEBUG util.py:443:   Problem 1: nothing provides requested (python3dist(blinker) < 1.5~~ with python3dist(blinker) >= 1.4)
DEBUG util.py:443:   Problem 2: nothing provides requested (python3dist(flask) < 2.2~~ with python3dist(flask) >= 1.1.1)
DEBUG util.py:443:   Problem 3: nothing provides requested (python3dist(wsproto) < 1.2~~ with python3dist(wsproto) >= 1)
DEBUG util.py:443:   Problem 4: nothing provides requested (python3dist(zstandard) < 0.19~~ with python3dist(zstandard) >= 0.11)
DEBUG util.py:445:  (try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages)
DEBUG util.py:596:  Child return code was: 1

Please fix dependencies to build on current rawhide. It seems adjustment to newer versions is required.

python3-blinker-0:1.5-1.fc37.noarch
python3-flask-1:2.2.2-1.fc37.noarch
python3-wsproto-0:1.2.0-1.fc38.noarch
python3-zstandard-0:0.19.0-1.fc38.x86_64

Comment 2 Petr Menšík 2023-01-18 18:58:07 UTC
Created attachment 1939023 [details]
root.log

Comment 3 Petr Menšík 2023-01-18 18:58:38 UTC
Created attachment 1939024 [details]
build.log

Comment 4 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2023-01-20 18:28:17 UTC
Spec URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/mitmproxy/mitmproxy.spec
SRPM URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/mitmproxy/mitmproxy-8.1.1-2.fc37.src.rpm

* Fri Jan 20 2023 Dominik Mierzejewski <dominik> - 8.1.1-2
- relax deps versions requirements to fix build on rawhide
- fix tests

NOTE: I can't update to 9.0.x because some dependencies are too old in Fedora rawhide, in particular pyOpenSSL 22.1 is required.

Comment 5 Fabio Valentini 2023-01-20 18:35:51 UTC
If you need help with packaging mitmproxy_wireguard (a new dependency of mitmproxy 9), let me know. I'm the upstream developer. :)

Comment 6 Jakub Kadlčík 2023-01-20 18:40:38 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5278069
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2109939-mitmproxy/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05278069-mitmproxy/fedora-review/review.txt

Please take a look if any issues were found.

---
This comment was created by the fedora-review-service
https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service

Comment 7 Petr Menšík 2023-10-04 16:02:55 UTC
It seems once again the package is no longer buildable as it is. Review failed to build it with:

Finish: rpmbuild mitmproxy-8.1.1-2.fc37.src.rpm
Finish: build phase for mitmproxy-8.1.1-2.fc37.src.rpm
ERROR: Exception(/home/pemensik/fedora/rawhide/2109939-mitmproxy/srpm/mitmproxy-8.1.1-2.fc37.src.rpm) Config(fedora-rawhide-x86_64) 0 minutes 34 seconds
INFO: Results and/or logs in: /home/pemensik/fedora/rawhide/2109939-mitmproxy/results
ERROR: Command failed: 
 # /usr/bin/systemd-nspawn -q -M 9f7bca7d9a74444185960059c1203d86 -D /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64-bootstrap/root -a --capability=cap_ipc_lock --bind=/tmp/mock-resolv.fxon_rzx:/etc/resolv.conf --console=pipe --setenv=TERM=vt100 --setenv=SHELL=/bin/bash --setenv=HOME=/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/installation-homedir --setenv=HOSTNAME=mock --setenv=PATH=/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/sbin:/sbin --setenv=PROMPT_COMMAND=printf "\033]0;<mock-chroot>\007" --setenv=PS1=<mock-chroot> \s-\v\$  --setenv=LANG=C.UTF-8 --setenv=LC_MESSAGES=C.UTF-8 --resolv-conf=off /usr/bin/dnf-3 builddep --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 40 --setopt=deltarpm=False --setopt=allow_vendor_change=yes --allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk --disableplugin=versionlock /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/builddir/build/SRPMS/mitmproxy-8.1.1-2.fc40.buildreqs.nosrc.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts
No matches found for the following disable plugin patterns: local, spacewalk, versionlock
fedora                                           67 kB/s | 8.2 kB     00:00    
Package python3-sortedcontainers-2.4.0-13.fc39.noarch is already installed.
Package glibc-langpack-en-2.38.9000-12.fc40.x86_64 is already installed.
Package pyproject-rpm-macros-1.10.0-1.fc40.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-devel-3.12.0-1.fc40.x86_64 is already installed.
Package python3-devel-3.12.0-1.fc40.x86_64 is already installed.
Package python3-setuptools-68.2.2-1.fc40.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-hypothesis-6.82.0-2.fc40.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-packaging-23.1-5.fc40.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-parver-0.4-1.fc40.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-pip-23.2.1-1.fc39.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-pytest-7.4.2-1.fc40.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-pytest-asyncio-0.21.0-5.fc39.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-pytest-xdist-3.3.1-3.fc39.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-setuptools-68.2.2-1.fc40.noarch is already installed.
Package python3-wheel-1:0.40.0-4.fc39.noarch is already installed.
Error: 
 Problem 1: nothing provides requested (python3dist(asgiref) < 3.6~~ with python3dist(asgiref) >= 3.2.10)
 Problem 2: nothing provides requested (python3dist(blinker) < 1.6~~ with python3dist(blinker) >= 1.4)
 Problem 3: nothing provides requested (python3dist(brotli) < 1.1~~ with python3dist(brotli) >= 1)
 Problem 4: nothing provides requested (python3dist(cryptography) < 38~~ with python3dist(cryptography) >= 36)
 Problem 5: nothing provides requested (python3dist(h11) < 0.14~~ with python3dist(h11) >= 0.11)
 Problem 6: nothing provides requested (python3dist(pyopenssl) < 22.1~~ with python3dist(pyopenssl) >= 21)
 Problem 7: nothing provides requested (python3dist(urwid) < 2.2~~ with python3dist(urwid) >= 2.1.1)
 Problem 8: nothing provides requested (python3dist(zstandard) < 0.20~~ with python3dist(zstandard) >= 0.11)
(try to add '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages)

I expect another version rebase might fix it. At least python3-pyOpenSSL-0:23.2.0-1.fc40.noarch is now in rawhide. But it seems moving quite fast a breaking dependencies often.

Comment 8 Package Review 2024-10-04 00:45:28 UTC
This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

Comment 9 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2024-10-04 06:39:03 UTC
I'm still interested in packaging this. I'll post a new working SRPM soon.


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