Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://girst.fedorapeople.org/nginx-mod-js-challenge.spec SRPM URL: https://girst.fedorapeople.org/nginx-mod-js-challenge-0%5e20230517.gitda6852d-1.fc44.src.rpm Description: Simple JavaScript proof-of-work based access for Nginx with virtually no overhead Fedora Account System Username: girst a simple proof of work plugin for nginx, similar to anubis, that isn't another reverse proxy. upstream: https://github.com/simon987/ngx_http_js_challenge_module demo: https://git.gir.st/VimFx.git/blame/483123084b9f585aa6032d5ef1f07b1e25ccd872:/package.json This uses the macros for out-of-tree nginx modules, as per https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nginx/pull-request/12 and other nginx-mod-* packages. fedora-review complains about unowned directories. I wasn't able to get rid of this, but it appears that is the norm with all these packages.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9646100 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2401580-nginx-mod-js-challenge/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09646100-nginx-mod-js-challenge/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.
I think it may probably require nginx-core and nginx-filesystem to satisfy some directory deps (see bellow). Other than that LGTM. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [-]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required. Note: Sources not installed [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: 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. Probably OK, private path. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package contains no static executables. [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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla upstream sources. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/yarda/git- fedora/nginx-mod-js-challenge/2401580-nginx-mod-js- challenge/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/nginx This is probably nginx packaging problem, /usr/lib64/nginx/modules is owned by nginx-core, but not /usr/lib64/nginx. This package is installing into %nginx_moddir, which on x86_64 is: /usr/lib64/nginx/modules I.e. there is probably nothing to fix in this package. [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/nginx, /usr/share/nginx/modules, /usr/lib64/nginx/modules, /usr/share/nginx It may probably require nginx-core and nginx-filesystem to satisfy this deps, even then /usr/lib64/nginx is unowned, see above. [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. [x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. I think it may probably require nginx-core and nginx-filesystem to satisfy the deps, see above. [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. [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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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 work. [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 %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 3124 bytes in 1 files. [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). [?]: Package functions as described. Untested. [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]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: 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]: 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: [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) RPM autochangelog false alarm. [x]: Rpmlint is run on debuginfo package(s). Note: No rpmlint messages. [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. Rpmlint ------- Checking: nginx-mod-js-challenge-0^20230517.gitda6852d-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm nginx-mod-js-challenge-0^20230517.gitda6852d-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpdk9ph6p8')] checks: 32, packages: 2 nginx-mod-js-challenge.src: E: summary-too-long Simple JavaScript proof-of-work based access for Nginx with virtually no overhead nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: E: summary-too-long Simple JavaScript proof-of-work based access for Nginx with virtually no overhead nginx-mod-js-challenge.spec: W: no-%check-section nginx-mod-js-challenge.src: E: description-line-too-long Simple JavaScript proof-of-work based access for Nginx with virtually no overhead. nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long Simple JavaScript proof-of-work based access for Nginx with virtually no overhead. 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.9 s Rpmlint (debuginfo) ------------------- Checking: nginx-mod-js-challenge-debuginfo-0^20230517.gitda6852d-1.fc44.x86_64.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.6.1 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp8frw1vw1')] checks: 32, packages: 1 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 2 nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_http_core_module (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_conf_set_flag_slot (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_conf_set_num_slot (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_conf_set_str_slot (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_http_send_header (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_http_finalize_request (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_palloc (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_http_output_filter (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_array_push (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_pcalloc (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_log_error_core (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so ngx_conf_log_error (/usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so) nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: E: summary-too-long Simple JavaScript proof-of-work based access for Nginx with virtually no overhead nginx-mod-js-challenge.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long Simple JavaScript proof-of-work based access for Nginx with virtually no overhead. 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 12 warnings, 9 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.6 s Unversioned so-files -------------------- nginx-mod-js-challenge: /usr/lib64/nginx/modules/ngx_http_js_challenge_module.so Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/simon987/ngx_http_js_challenge_module/archive/da6852df4103492f9136ef814cda0c7d402e0a90.zip : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6391587ae54ca243760e3ecc08032ab0bdfb3b8dbb234f5cf5b9ba5b2409929a CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6391587ae54ca243760e3ecc08032ab0bdfb3b8dbb234f5cf5b9ba5b2409929a Requires -------- nginx-mod-js-challenge (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) nginx(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- nginx-mod-js-challenge: nginx-mod-js-challenge nginx-mod-js-challenge(x86-64) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/yarda/git-fedora/nginx-mod-js-challenge/2401580-nginx-mod-js-challenge/srpm/nginx-mod-js-challenge.spec 2025-10-10 12:27:57.628804320 +0200 +++ /home/yarda/git-fedora/nginx-mod-js-challenge/2401580-nginx-mod-js-challenge/srpm-unpacked/nginx-mod-js-challenge.spec 2025-10-04 02:00:00.000000000 +0200 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.8.1) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 1; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + %global commithash da6852df4103492f9136ef814cda0c7d402e0a90 %global origname ngx_http_js_challenge_module @@ -43,3 +53,6 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +## START: Generated by rpmautospec +* Sat Oct 04 2025 John Doe <packager> - 0^20230517.gitda6852d-1 +- Uncommitted changes +## END: Generated by rpmautospec Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2401580 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, C/C++, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Perl, PHP, fonts, Ocaml, Haskell, Python, R, Java, SugarActivity Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
thanks for the review! both ... Requires: nginx(abi) ... and ... BuildRequires: nginx-mod-devel ... should pull in nginx-core and nginx-filesystem, so specifying them directly shouldn't make a difference. I'll go ahead and request the dist-git repo now.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nginx-mod-js-challenge
FEDORA-2025-ee51889b52 (nginx-mod-js-challenge-0^20230517.gitda6852d-1.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-ee51889b52
FEDORA-2025-ee51889b52 (nginx-mod-js-challenge-0^20230517.gitda6852d-1.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5c1ed16399 (nginx-mod-js-challenge-0^20230517.gitda6852d-1.el9) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5c1ed16399
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5c1ed16399 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5c1ed16399 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-EPEL-2025-5c1ed16399 (nginx-mod-js-challenge-0^20230517.gitda6852d-1.el9) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.