Bug 1164348 (qca) - Review Request: qca - Qt Cryptographic Architecture
Summary: Review Request: qca - Qt Cryptographic Architecture
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: qca
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Helio Chissini de Castro
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
: 1161767 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: qt-reviews 512000
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-11-14 18:05 UTC by Rex Dieter
Modified: 2014-12-01 19:57 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

(edit)
Clone Of:
(edit)
Last Closed: 2014-12-01 15:54:19 UTC
helio: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Rex Dieter 2014-11-14 18:05:42 UTC
Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qca/qca.spec
SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qca/qca-2.1.0-1.fc20.src.rpm
Description: Qt Cryptographic Architecture
Fedora Account System Username: rdieter

Scratch build:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8143408

Comment 1 Rex Dieter 2014-11-14 18:06:43 UTC
This is a update and rename of existing qca2 package

Comment 2 Rex Dieter 2014-11-14 18:07:12 UTC
*** Bug 1161767 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Rex Dieter 2014-11-14 18:18:11 UTC
Fyi, qca can now support Qt5 too, but I chose to not include that yet, in order to keep the review simpler.

Comment 4 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-14 18:22:08 UTC
Please add documentation and botan plugins subpackages.
Use make doc to build documentation. Seems I didn't do install target for docs. So I must be copied to installation folder.

Comment 5 Rex Dieter 2014-11-14 18:48:36 UTC
Spec URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qca/qca.spec
SRPM URL: https://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qca/qca-2.1.0-2.fc20.src.rpm

%changelog
* Fri Nov 14 2014 Rex Dieter <rdieter@fedoraproject.org> 2.1.0-2
- -botan, -doc subpkgs, and READMEs to plugin subpkgs

Comment 6 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-14 18:52:15 UTC
#The following tests FAILED:
#          8 - FileWatch (Failed) 
How I can reproduce this?

Comment 7 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-14 19:16:41 UTC
Maybe should use %{_docdir} instead of %{_qt4_docdir}? Or there are reasons to use %{_qt4_docdir}?

Comment 8 Rex Dieter 2014-11-14 19:51:47 UTC
Considering we will likely be adding qt5 support in the near future, using a Qt agnostic dir makes sense.  I'll switch that in the next pkg iteration (but won't update the review *just* for that.

As far as the failed test, good question, maybe the mock/koji environment is different somehow.  You should be able to reproduce it in mock yourself, then run 'mock shell' to entire into the buildroot for more investigation if needed.

Comment 9 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-14 23:28:25 UTC
Need to gnupg to BR. It is used in tests.

Comment 10 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-14 23:37:13 UTC
I rebuild qca for F21 x68_64 in mock. But can't reproduce FileWatcher failing unittest

Comment 11 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-15 20:14:35 UTC
$ rpm -qpl /home/taurus/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/qca-2.1.0-2.fc20.R.x86_64.rpm
/usr/bin/mozcerts
/usr/bin/qcatool
/usr/lib64/libqca.so.2
/usr/lib64/libqca.so.2.1.0

It is bad idea to mix library and executable files. In this case I can't install on my system both qca.x86_64 and qca.i686 pacakges. Also mozcerts and qcatool not need for regular users. So this files should be moved to separate subpackes qca-tools for example or something like.

Comment 12 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-15 20:16:55 UTC
I wonder is it OK that package doesn't provide libqca-2.1.so ?

Comment 13 Rex Dieter 2014-11-15 22:34:39 UTC
Re: comment #11
binaries should be ok, rpm uses binary coloring to prefer native binaries in this context.

Not sure what you mean by comment #12 , the library soname is libqca.so.2 (not libqca-2-1.so)

Comment 14 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-15 22:48:00 UTC
[root@lix lib64]# ll libQtCore.so.*
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root      18 Nov 14 02:14 libQtCore.so.4 -> libQtCore.so.4.8.6
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root      18 Nov 14 02:14 libQtCore.so.4.8 -> libQtCore.so.4.8.6
-rwxr-xr-x  1 root root 3108864 Jul 24 00:32 libQtCore.so.4.8.6
[root@lix lib64]# ll libqca.so.*
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root      15 Nov 14 02:15 libqca.so.2 -> libqca.so.2.0.3
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root      15 Nov 14 02:15 libqca.so.2.0 -> libqca.so.2.0.3
-rwxr-xr-x  1 root root 1154456 Aug  4  2013 libqca.so.2.0.3

In new qca no libqca.so.2.1 . There are only libqca.so.2 and libqca.so.2.1.0.

Comment 15 Ivan Romanov 2014-11-15 23:24:27 UTC
(In reply to Rex Dieter from comment #13)
> Re: comment #11
> binaries should be ok, rpm uses binary coloring to prefer native binaries in
> this context.
Yes. I checked it. No any problems. I installed both qca.i686 and qca.x86_64
# rpm -qa | grep qca
qca-devel-2.1.0-2.fc20.i686
qca-2.1.0-2.fc20.x86_64
qca-ossl-2.1.0-2.fc20.x86_64
qca-devel-2.1.0-2.fc20.x86_64
qca-gnupg-2.1.0-2.fc20.x86_64
qca-2.1.0-2.fc20.i686

Comment 16 Helio Chissini de Castro 2014-11-26 18:14:41 UTC
Package is fine. About time to normalize names.

APPROVED

Comment 17 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 12:55:18 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: qca
Short Description: Qt Cryptographic Architecture
Upstream URL:  http://delta.affinix.com/qca
Owners: rdieter, slankes
Branches: f21,f20
InitialCC:

Comment 18 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 12:55:51 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: qca
Short Description: Qt Cryptographic Architecture
Upstream URL:  http://delta.affinix.com/qca
Owners: rdieter slankes
Branches: f21 f20
InitialCC:

Comment 19 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 13:02:42 UTC
Forgot, the package exists, but is retired and just needs some new branches.

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: qca
New Branches: f21 f20
Owners: rdieter slankes

Comment 20 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-12-01 13:35:48 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 21 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 15:54:19 UTC
Imported, thanks.

Comment 22 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 16:21:31 UTC
Boo, Qt5 build uses the same library soname and pkgconfig file names, so not parallel-installable with Qt4 versions.

Ivan, would you accept a patch to rename those to include a -qt5 suffix (when building against Qt5)?

Comment 23 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 16:24:59 UTC
And cmake files too.

Comment 24 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 18:39:50 UTC
Looks like I might be able to set QCA_SUFFIX=qt5 for this purpose, but I'd argue this should be set automatically in a standard way, else we risk API/ABI-incompatible implementations for different distros choosing different values for QCA_SUFFIX.

Comment 25 Rex Dieter 2014-12-01 19:06:48 UTC
cmake files didn't use QCA_SUFFIX (yet), here's the patch I'm using currently,
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/qca.git/tree/qca-2.1.0-cmake_QCA_SUFFIX.patch

Comment 26 Ivan Romanov 2014-12-01 19:57:54 UTC
> but I'd argue this should be set automatically in a standard way

You are not alone :( https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121168/

In really you must use two patches for Qt5 coinstalled version. 
http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=qca.git&a=commit&h=9a9c16dfd1affc92962acd92e4a5246830ccbc04
http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=qca.git&a=commit&h=66447d0454591f4c1deb5f4c988c6027194b1335

Anyway this all out of scope. Please make separate bugreport if you need/want.


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