Bug 742996 - Review Request: libpwquality - A library for password generation and password quality checking
Summary: Review Request: libpwquality - A library for password generation and password...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Miloslav Trmač
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-10-03 14:31 UTC by Tomas Mraz
Modified: 2011-12-13 02:18 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-10-12 13:03:35 UTC
Type: ---
mitr: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Tomas Mraz 2011-10-03 14:31:55 UTC
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~tmraz/testing/libpwquality.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~tmraz/testing/libpwquality-0.9-1.fc14.src.rpm
Description: 
This is a library for password quality checks and generation
of random passwords that pass the checks.
This library uses the cracklib and cracklib dictionaries
to perform some of the checks.

Comment 1 Miloslav Trmač 2011-10-10 13:46:36 UTC
rpmlint:
> libpwquality.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cracklib -> crack lib, crack-lib, crackling
> libpwquality-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pwquality -> quality
> libpwquality.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cracklib -> crack lib, crack-lib, crackling
false positives

> libpwquality-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
oh well... upstream issue

> libpwquality.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pwscore
> libpwquality.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pwmake
upstream issue, however would be good to fix soonish

Needs fixing:
* Doesn't build in koji
  At least missing BuildRequires: pam-devel
* Licensing problems/uncertainty:
  * License field says (BSD and GPLv2+)
  * Licensing guidelines require using "or" for dual licensing
  * Source files allow BSD or referenced GPL (note: not GPLv2, not GPL+!)
  * COPYING contains the same reference to GPL without v2/+, but includes
    text of GPLv2
* Source URL incorrect
* Per "File and Directory Ownership" (gdm example), there should be
  > Requires: pam
  for {/etc,%_libdir}/security instead of relying on the automatic libpam
  dependency.


Not sure:
* I'm not quite happy about
  > ln -sf ../../%{_lib}/libpwquality.so.*.* libpwquality.so
  this only works for some values of %{_libdir}.  Using an absolute symlink
  would be more general - OTOH this is not really a concern for Fedora
* If you plan to maintain ChangeLog, please include it in %doc

Notes:
* Unnecessary
  > Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig
  - the -p interpreter is added automatically
* BuildRoot: is unnecessary
* %global is preferred over %define
* Consider using (make install ... INSTALL='install -p') to preserve timestamps

Comment 2 Tomas Mraz 2011-10-10 18:02:10 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> 
> > libpwquality-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> oh well... upstream issue
I plan to add some documentation in future. Currently the API is at least partially documented in the comments in the public header file.
 
> > libpwquality.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pwscore
> > libpwquality.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary pwmake
> upstream issue, however would be good to fix soonish
Yeah, I plan to add the manpage soon.

> Needs fixing:
> * Doesn't build in koji
>   At least missing BuildRequires: pam-devel
Fixed. Now I verified that it builds in mock.

> * Licensing problems/uncertainty:
>   * License field says (BSD and GPLv2+)
>   * Licensing guidelines require using "or" for dual licensing
>   * Source files allow BSD or referenced GPL (note: not GPLv2, not GPL+!)
>   * COPYING contains the same reference to GPL without v2/+, but includes
>     text of GPLv2
Fixed to 'BSD or GPL+' which is correct according to the License guidelines.

> * Source URL incorrect
Fixed.

> * Per "File and Directory Ownership" (gdm example), there should be
>   > Requires: pam
>   for {/etc,%_libdir}/security instead of relying on the automatic libpam
>   dependency.
Fixed.

> Not sure:
> * I'm not quite happy about
>   > ln -sf ../../%{_lib}/libpwquality.so.*.* libpwquality.so
>   this only works for some values of %{_libdir}.  Using an absolute symlink
>   would be more general - OTOH this is not really a concern for Fedora
I do not think we care about hypotetical or third party distributions. This is Fedora packaging and if %{_libdir} changes significantly we will have to change the spec probably anyway.

> * If you plan to maintain ChangeLog, please include it in %doc
There is nothing meaningful in it yet. I plan to generate more meaningful changelog from upstream hg commits.

> Notes:
> * Unnecessary
>   > Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig
>   - the -p interpreter is added automatically
Removed.

> * BuildRoot: is unnecessary
Removed.

> * %global is preferred over %define
Replaced.

> * Consider using (make install ... INSTALL='install -p') to preserve timestamps
Added.
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/~tmraz/testing/libpwquality.spec
SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/~tmraz/testing/libpwquality-0.9-2.fc17.src.rpm

Comment 3 Miloslav Trmač 2011-10-11 18:50:22 UTC
Thanks, accepted.

Comment 4 Tomas Mraz 2011-10-11 19:18:49 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: libpwquality
Short Description: A library for password generation and password quality checking
Owners: tmraz
Branches: f16
InitialCC:

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-10-11 19:40:06 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 6 Tomas Mraz 2011-10-12 13:03:35 UTC
Built in rawhide. In F16 it will be built later.

Comment 7 Tomas Mraz 2011-12-12 21:10:58 UTC
Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: libpwquality
New Branches: el5 el6
Owners: tmraz

Comment 8 Gwyn Ciesla 2011-12-13 02:18:27 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).


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