Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: libyubikey - Library for parsing / decrypting Yubikey passwords
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Summary: Review Request: libyubikey - Library for parsing / decrypting Yubikey passwords Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: maxim@wzzrd.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/284093/libyubikey.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/284093/libyubikey-1.5-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: library for the Yubico authentication device, the Yubikey
A Yubikey is a little gadget that generates one-time passwords. I am working on packaging ykpers too, which allows for customization of AES key inside the Yubikey. ykpers requires libyubikey.
This is not the first Yubikey software in Fedora. We already have pam_yubico (a PAM module for the device) and ykclient (a general CLI) in the repositories.
This is my first package for Fedora, so I will need a sponsor. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |557794
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Akio Idehara zbe64533@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |zbe64533@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Akio Idehara zbe64533@gmail.com 2010-01-23 22:44:07 EST --- Hello. Here are some note:
(1) Documentation - "rpmlint" says "libyubikey-devel.i686: W: no-documentation". - Pay attention about which subpackage you include documentation in, for example API documentation belongs in the -devel subpackage, not the main one. * http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Documentation
(2) Compiler flags - Compilers used to build packages should honor the applicable compiler flags set in the system rpm configuration. * http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags - $RPM_OPT_FLAGS or %{optflags} for C, C++, and Fortran compilers.
(3) Timestamps - Please keep timestamps on installed files as much as possible: * http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps - When using "cp" or "install" commands add "-p" option - Also please consider to add 'INSTALLFLAGS="-c -p"' to "make install"
(4) URL - The URL and the Source0 is old (redirected), please keep the latest URL. * "http://code.google.com/p/yubico-c/"
(5) binary files - If the software being packaged contains files intended solely for development, those files should be put in a -devel subpackage. * http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Devel_Packages o %{_bindir}/modhex o %{_bindir}/ykdebug
(6) pkgconfig file - This library does not have pkgconfig file(.pc), so "BuildRequires: pkgconfig" is needless.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #2 from Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com 2010-01-24 09:08:41 EST --- Thanks for looking at this, Akio. I went over your notes:
1. Correct, but as modhex and ykdebug went to -devel, so did README (which is about those two files for the largest part). So -devel now has a %doc section. 2. Fixed. 3. Looked into this. I redid the download so it's timestamp matches upstream. However, the Makefile doesn't seem to handle INSTALLFLAGS or pass it to install-sh, but the timestamps of installed files are intact, afaics. I don't think the install part needs fixing. Please correct me if I'm wrong; I really want to learn this. 4. Fixed. 5. Moved them to -devel. I agree that is a better place for those binaries. 6. Fixed. Missed that.
New versions at: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/284093/update-1/libyubikey.spec http://dl.dropbox.com/u/284093/update-1/libyubikey-1.5-3.fc12.src.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-24 14:15:18 EST --- Some notes for 1.5-3
* Compilar flags - "CFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS"" in "make %{?_smp_mflags}" is not needed.
configure generated by recent autotools acknowledges CFLAGS environment and %configure sets this. Please check what %configure actually does by $ rpm --eval %configure .
* Timestamp - Please consider to use -------------------------------------------------------------------- %{__make} install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="%{__install} -p" -------------------------------------------------------------------- to keep timestamps on installed files. This method usually works for Makefiles generated by recent autotools.
* %defattr - Now we prefer to use %defattr(-,root,root,-)
* File placement - As the Summary of the main package already says "low-level C software *development* kit", I don't see strict necessity for putting two binaries into -devel package.
- Also "README" should usually be packaged in main package.
* %changelog - It is recommended to put one line between each %changelog entry like below because it is useful on Fedora CVS --------------------------------------------------------------------- * Sun Jan 24 2010 - Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com - 1.5-3 - Took out the dep on libusb1-devel - Moved README doc to -devel: it's mostly about ykdebug and modhex
* Sun Jan 24 2010 - Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com - 1.5-2 - Used macros in Source0 - URL no longer point to redirect - Removed INSTALL from documentation - Moved modhex and ykdebug to -devel - Inserted compilerflags - Inserted INSTALLFLAGS to keep timestamps - Some more macros for make and sed
* Wed Jan 20 2010 - Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com - 1.5-1 - First packaged release ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #4 from Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com 2010-01-24 15:51:05 EST --- Mamoru, thank you for looking into this package.
Timestamps: done. Compilerflags: reverted. Defattr: done. Changelog: done. File placement: reverted.
Updated files: - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/284093/update-2/libyubikey.spec - http://dl.dropbox.com/u/284093/update-2/libyubikey-1.5-4.fc12.src.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #5 from Akio Idehara zbe64533@gmail.com 2010-01-25 08:39:12 EST --- Sorry. The above review comment was my FIRST one and it introduced the confusion....
Mamoru-san: I have one question about rpmlint. It still says "libyubikey-devel.i686: W: no-documentation". Could we simply ignore this message?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-25 13:07:30 EST --- (In reply to comment #5)
Mamoru-san: I have one question about rpmlint. It still says "libyubikey-devel.i686: W: no-documentation". Could we simply ignore this message?
If the needed documents are already installed in one of the rpms the rpm depens on, we ignore this warning.
Now - This package can be approved. - You have another review requests, which is in good shape to some extent.
------------------------------------------------------ This package (libyubikey) is APPROVED by mtasaka ------------------------------------------------------
Please follow the procedure written on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join from "Get a Fedora Account". After you request for sponsorship a mail will be sent to sponsor members automatically (which is invisible for you) which notifies that you need a sponsor. After that, please also write on this bug for confirmation that you requested for sponsorship and your FAS (Fedora Account System) name. Then I will sponsor you.
If you want to import this package into Fedora 11/12, you also have to look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UpdatesSystem/Bodhi-info-DRAFT (after once you rebuilt this package on koji Fedora rebuilding system).
If you have questions, please ask me.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #7 from Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com 2010-01-26 02:13:29 EST --- Mamoru, I have requested membership. My FAS name is wzzrd.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
--- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-26 02:40:32 EST --- Now I am sponsoring you. Please follow "Join" wiki again.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #9 from Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com 2010-01-26 04:00:40 EST --- Thanks! Here's the CVS request:
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: libyubikey Short Description: C library for decrypting and parsing Yubikey One-time passwords Owners: wzzrd Branches: F-12 InitialCC:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #10 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2010-01-27 00:25:06 EST --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #11 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-27 09:23:52 EST --- Please actually build this package on koji (not by scratch build) and for F-12 please submit push requests on bodhi.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #12 from Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com 2010-01-27 09:33:15 EST --- Will do. CVS import gave me a hard time this morning, so as soon as I have that working, I'm building. The scratch builds were just me checking out koji.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-01-27 14:43:40 EST --- libyubikey-1.5-4.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libyubikey-1.5-4.fc12
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #14 from Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com 2010-01-27 14:45:23 EST --- Submitted to Bodhi. Thanks, Mamoru!
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-01-27 15:03:57 EST --- Closing.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2010-01-31 20:20:34 EST --- libyubikey-1.5-4.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version| |1.5-4.fc12 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #17 from Maxim Burgerhout maxim@wzzrd.com 2010-10-13 02:51:22 EDT --- Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: libyubikey New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: wzzrd
Recent builds of fedora-packager require ykpers (and therefore libyubikey); fedora-packager availability in EPEL requires availability of ykpers and libyubikey in EPEL, too.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557776
--- Comment #18 from Tom "spot" Callaway tcallawa@redhat.com 2010-10-13 11:09:38 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org