Bug 2400470 - Review Request: go-fdo-server - Servers for FDO compliant device onboarding
Summary: Review Request: go-fdo-server - Servers for FDO compliant device onboarding
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mikel Olasagasti Uranga
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-09-30 15:09 UTC by Ken Giusti
Modified: 2025-10-23 19:54 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-10-23 19:54:40 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
mikel: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9632465 to 9642272 (4.30 KB, patch)
2025-10-03 09:45 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9642272 to 9688452 (2.76 KB, patch)
2025-10-14 18:14 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9688452 to 9692464 (1.29 KB, patch)
2025-10-15 20:51 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9696633 to 9717602 (3.49 KB, patch)
2025-10-22 17:51 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff

Description Ken Giusti 2025-09-30 15:09:54 UTC
Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/packages/kgiusti/go-fdo-server/go-fdo-server.git/plain/go-fdo-server.spec

SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/kgiusti/go-fdo-server/srpm-builds/09632334/go-fdo-server-git20250930.825da0b-0.1.fc41.src.rpm

Description: go-fdo-server provides golang-based servers that perform edge device on-boarding as defined by the FIDO Alliance Device Onboard specification.

Fedora Account System Username: kgiusti

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2025-09-30 15:10:14 UTC
Cannot find any valid SRPM URL for this ticket. Common causes are:

- You didn't specify `SRPM URL: ...` in the ticket description
  or any of your comments
- The URL schema isn't HTTP or HTTPS
- The SRPM package linked in your URL doesn't match the package name specified
  in the ticket summary


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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 2 Ken Giusti 2025-09-30 15:15:43 UTC
Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/packages/kgiusti/go-fdo-server/go-fdo-server.git/plain/go-fdo-server.spec

SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/kgiusti/go-fdo-server/srpm-builds/09632334/go-fdo-server-git20250930.825da0b-0.1.fc41.src.rpm

Description: go-fdo-server provides golang-based servers that perform edge device on-boarding as defined by the FIDO Alliance Device Onboard specification.

Fedora Account System Username: kgiusti

Comment 3 Fedora Review Service 2025-09-30 15:21:51 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9632465
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2400470-go-fdo-server/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09632465-go-fdo-server/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Systemd service file(s) in go-fdo-server-manufacturer, go-fdo-server-rendezvous, go-fdo-server-owner
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets

Please know that there can be false-positives.

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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 5 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-03 09:45:16 UTC
Created attachment 2108340 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9632465 to 9642272

Comment 6 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-03 09:45:18 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9642272
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2400470-go-fdo-server/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09642272-go-fdo-server/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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 7 Mikel Olasagasti Uranga 2025-10-13 14:27:09 UTC
Can you rerun go2rpm with 1.18.0 version and then add all the subpackages?

  $ go2rpm -p vendor --name go-fdo-server github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo-server

This should clean the spec of things like combined_license or Source0

Comment 9 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-14 18:14:06 UTC
Created attachment 2109719 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9642272 to 9688452

Comment 10 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-14 18:14:09 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9688452
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2400470-go-fdo-server/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09688452-go-fdo-server/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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 11 Mikel Olasagasti Uranga 2025-10-14 20:27:30 UTC
- Remove:

> #%%global tag             v0.0.0
> #%%global commit          08a576eb601fcdb94ee7fa219c16c02834a649e5

- Add something like this after %global goipath:

%global commit          e48986e6b56ae67f738a2543b5bd2a01e016668c

- Version is 0

> Version:        git20251014.a84153b

- gometa -L -f should be before on top of Name as the template does

- Source0 should be %{gosource}, why do you specify it manually?

> Source0:        go-fdo-server-git20251014.a84153b.tar.gz

- Source1 should be %{archivename}-vendor.tar.bz2 not %{name}-%{version}-vendor.tar.gz

> Source1:        %{name}-%{version}-vendor.tar.gz

- License is missing in the main package. Add:

%license vendor/modules.txt

Comment 12 Miguel Martin 2025-10-15 10:56:31 UTC
(In reply to Mikel Olasagasti Uranga from comment #11)
> - Remove:
> 
> > #%%global tag             v0.0.0
> > #%%global commit          08a576eb601fcdb94ee7fa219c16c02834a649e5
> 

OK

> - Add something like this after %global goipath:
> 
> %global commit          e48986e6b56ae67f738a2543b5bd2a01e016668c
> 

OK

> - Version is 0
> 
> > Version:        git20251014.a84153b
> 

OK

> - gometa -L -f should be before on top of Name as the template does
> 

If we don't set `%global commit` we need to put the gometa macro after `Version:` tag
as per documentation. That's the reason of moving it

> - Source0 should be %{gosource}, why do you specify it manually?
> 
> > Source0:        go-fdo-server-git20251014.a84153b.tar.gz

The original spec file contains %{gosource} but it looks like the URL contains a modified version.

> 
> - Source1 should be %{archivename}-vendor.tar.bz2 not
> %{name}-%{version}-vendor.tar.gz
> 
> > Source1:        %{name}-%{version}-vendor.tar.gz
> 

The reason for this is that `%{archivename}` macro didn't expand/does not exist in CentOS

> - License is missing in the main package. Add:
> 
> %license vendor/modules.txt

If we add that line we get an rpmlint warning:

RPM build warnings:
    File listed twice: /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server

I guess that file is already included by `%files -f %{go_vendor_license_filelist}`

Comment 14 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-15 20:51:46 UTC
Created attachment 2109876 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9688452 to 9692464

Comment 15 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-15 20:51:48 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9692464
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2400470-go-fdo-server/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09692464-go-fdo-server/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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 18 Ken Giusti 2025-10-16 20:12:44 UTC
[fedora-review-service-build]

Comment 19 Ken Giusti 2025-10-16 20:20:49 UTC
Hi Mikel - sorry for the churn, we've been making a few changes to get our upstream packit integration working with the new specfile.
Things should settled now, posting the results of the copr build https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/kgiusti/go-fdo-server/build/9695202

Generic:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Bad spec filename: /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/go-fdo-
     server/srpm-unpacked/go-fdo-server.spec
     See: (this test has no URL)

go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: tmpfile-not-in-filelist /etc/go-fdo-server
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary go-fdo-server
go-fdo-server-manufacturer.noarch: W: no-documentation
go-fdo-server-owner.noarch: W: no-documentation
go-fdo-server-rendezvous.noarch: W: no-documentation
go-fdo-server.spec: W: invalid-url Source1: go-fdo-server-a2d258a47464017cea850bfd60d2439656374543-vendor.tar.bz2
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: files-duplicate /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/sqlite/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/LICENSE:/usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/LICENSE:/usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/fsim/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: empty-%pre
go-fdo-server-manufacturer.noarch: W: empty-%pre
go-fdo-server-owner.noarch: W: empty-%pre
go-fdo-server-rendezvous.noarch: W: empty-%pre
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/fsim/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/sqlite/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/sqlite/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/github.com/fido-device-onboard/go-fdo/fsim/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/sys/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/crypto/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/sys/PATENTS /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/crypto/PATENTS
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/term/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/crypto/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/term/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/sys/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/term/PATENTS /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/crypto/PATENTS
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/term/PATENTS /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/sys/PATENTS
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/time/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/crypto/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/time/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/sys/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/time/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/term/LICENSE
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/time/PATENTS /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/crypto/PATENTS
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/time/PATENTS /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/sys/PATENTS
go-fdo-server.x86_64: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/time/PATENTS /usr/share/licenses/go-fdo-server/vendor/golang.org/x/term/PATENTS
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 27 warnings, 16 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 1.2 s

Comment 20 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-16 23:58:40 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9696630
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2400470-go-fdo-server/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09696630-go-fdo-server/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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 21 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-17 00:03:05 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9696633
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2400470-go-fdo-server/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09696633-go-fdo-server/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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 22 Ken Giusti 2025-10-22 12:02:58 UTC
Hi Mikel just a quick update.  I've been trying to fix this review issue:

Generic:
[!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
     Note: Bad spec filename: /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/go-fdo-
     server/srpm-unpacked/go-fdo-server.spec
     See: (this test has no URL)

I've looked into it a bit and I think this is a false negative: the check CheckSpecAsInSRPM verifies that the spec filename "go-fdo-server.spec" matches the prefix of the SRPM file "go-fdo-server-0-0.1.20251021gita2d258a.fc44.src.rpm" which it obviously does. So I put some debug tracing into the fedora-review tool and it turns out that the test is incorrectly checking the *filename of Source0*, not the SRPM as intended.  I've opened a bug against fedora-review for this: https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/issue/534

For what it's worth selectively running just the CheckSpecAsInSRPM (e.g. edora-review --single CheckSpecAsInSRPM --rpm-spec -n tmp/go-fdo-server-0-0.1.20251021gita2d258a.fc44.src.rpm) passes as I would expect.

What do you think? Can we ignore that warning?

Comment 24 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-22 17:51:18 UTC
Created attachment 2110474 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9696633 to 9717602

Comment 25 Fedora Review Service 2025-10-22 17:51:21 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9717602
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2400470-go-fdo-server/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09717602-go-fdo-server/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

If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new
Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.

Comment 26 Mikel Olasagasti Uranga 2025-10-23 13:16:18 UTC
Golang Package Review
==============

This package was generated using go2rpm and Go Vendor Tools, which simplifies the review.

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


- [x] The latest version is packaged or packaging an earlier version is justified.
- [x] The License tag reflects the package contents and uses the correct identifiers.
- [x] The package builds successfully in mock.
- [x] Package is installable (checked by fedora-review).
- [x] There are no relevant rpmlint errors.
- [x] The package runs tests in %check.
- [x] `%goipath` is set correctly.
- [?] The package's binaries don't conflict with binaries already in the distribution. (Some Go projects include utility binaries with very generic names)
- [?] There are no `%{_bindir}/*` wildcards in %files. (go2rpm includes these by default)
- [x] The package does not use `%gometa -f` if it has dependents that still build for %ix86.
- [x] The package complies with the Golang and general Packaging Guidelines.
- [-] GO_LDFLAGS are set correctly.

Package approved! On import, don't forget to do the following:

- [ ] Add the package to release-monitoring.org
- [ ] Give go-sig privileges (at least commit) on the package
- [ ] Close the review bug by referencing its ID in the rpm changelog and the Bodhi ticket.
- [ ] Consider configuring Packit service to help with maintenance

Comment 27 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2025-10-23 15:22:57 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/go-fdo-server

Comment 28 Fedora Update System 2025-10-23 16:19:19 UTC
FEDORA-2025-f5ae46ffe1 (go-fdo-server-0-0.1.20251022git1b0fd23.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-f5ae46ffe1

Comment 29 Fedora Update System 2025-10-23 19:54:40 UTC
FEDORA-2025-f5ae46ffe1 (go-fdo-server-0-0.1.20251022git1b0fd23.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 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.