Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: l7-filter-userspace - Userspace version of l7-filter
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526265
Summary: Review Request: l7-filter-userspace - Userspace version of l7-filter Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mail@marcus-moeller.ch QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://www.marcus-moeller.de/share/build/l7-filter-userspace/l7-filter-users... SRPM URL: http://www.marcus-moeller.de/share/build/l7-filter-userspace/l7-filter-users... Description:
L7-filter is a packet classifier for Linux. Unlike most other classifiers, it doesn't just look at simple values such as port numbers but does regular expression matching on the application layer data to determine what protocols are being used. This is a version of l7-filter that works in userspace instead of the kernel.
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=526265
Marcus Moeller mail@marcus-moeller.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |526263
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=526265
Marcus Moeller mail@marcus-moeller.ch 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=526265
Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |cwickert@fedoraproject.org AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |cwickert@fedoraproject.org Flag| |fedora-review?
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=526265
Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |itamar@ispbrasil.com.br
--- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br 2009-10-02 09:14:01 EDT --- seems to be good, will work without patching the kernel ?
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=526265
--- Comment #2 from Marcus Moeller mail@marcus-moeller.ch 2009-10-02 09:40:23 EDT --- At least on my F11 box it seems to work without further modifications as nf_conntrack_netlink is compiled into the kernel.
For further information about the current requirements, please take a look at:
http://l7-filter.sourceforge.net/HOWTO-userspace#Doing
Best Regards Marcus
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=526265
--- Comment #3 from Marcus Moeller mail@marcus-moeller.ch 2009-10-05 10:14:55 EDT --- rpmlint {SPECS,SRPMS,RPMS/i586}/l7-filter-userspace* 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
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=526265
--- Comment #4 from Simon Wesp cassmodiah@fedoraproject.org 2009-10-10 19:28:50 EDT --- %setup -q -n %{name}-%{version}
is equal to
%setup -q
-n is for naming that differs from name-version
---------------
%doc INSTALL
an install document is not required. The user installed a package and dont need a howto for source compiling and install. you did this with your package
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=526265
--- Comment #5 from Marcus Moeller mail@marcus-moeller.ch 2009-10-12 02:15:18 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.marcus-moeller.de/share/build/l7-filter-userspace/0.11-2/l7-filte... SRPM URL: http://www.marcus-moeller.de/share/build/l7-filter-userspace/0.11-2/l7-filte...
Description: Removed INSTALL from %doc
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=526265
--- Comment #6 from Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-21 11:47:32 EDT --- Build fails on F12 and devel: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1884039 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1884024
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=526265
--- Comment #7 from Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org 2009-12-21 12:06:14 EDT --- However here is a preliminary review. After you fix the build issue I will check the TBD items.
TBD - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package OK - MUST: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines OK - MUST: spec file name matches the base package %{name} OK - MUST: package meets the Packaging Guidelines OK - MUST: Fedora approved license and meets the Licensing Guidelines OK - MUST: License field in spec file matches the actual license: GPLv2+ OK - MUST: license file included in %doc OK - MUST: spec is in American English OK - MUST: spec is legible OK - MUST: sources match the upstream source by MD5 ac135b33fc7918bf1b25997bbff00c75 FAIL - MUST: successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms TBD - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. OK - MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires. N/A - MUST: handles locales properly with %find_lang N/A - MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun. OK - MUST: not designed to be relocatable OK - MUST: owns all directories that it creates OK - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly, includes %defattr(...) OK - MUST: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT OK - MUST: consistently uses macros OK - MUST: package contains code, or permissable content N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application N/A - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package N/A - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library files that end in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A - MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK - MUST: package does not own files or directories already owned by other packages. OK - MUST: at the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT OK - MUST: all filenames valid UTF-8
SHOULD Items: N/A - SHOULD: Source package includes license text(s) as a separate file. N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. TBD - SHOULD: builds in mock. TBD - SHOULD: compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported architectures. TBD - SHOULD: functions as described. N/A - SHOULD: Scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane. N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A - SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg OK - SHOULD: no file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin
Other items: OK - latest stable version OK - SourceURL valid OK - Compiler flags ok TBD - Debuginfo complete
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=526265
Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo?(mail@marcus-moell | |er.ch)
--- Comment #8 from Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org 2010-04-02 17:57:17 EDT --- Marcus, I am sorry the initial review took so long, but now it's up to you to get the package into a state where it builds again. Do you have any intentions to do so?
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=526265
Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution| |NOTABUG Flag|fedora-review?, | |needinfo?(mail@marcus-moell | |er.ch) |
--- Comment #9 from Christoph Wickert cwickert@fedoraproject.org 2010-07-16 14:30:17 EDT --- As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews I'm now closing this bug. Feel free to reopen once the packages are ready. Don't forget to remove the block on FE-DEADREVIEW then.
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=526265
Bug 526265 depends on bug 526263, which changed state.
Bug 526263 Summary: Review Request: l7-protocols - Protocol definitions files for l7-filter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526263
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG
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=526265
--- Comment #10 from Marcus Moeller marcus.moeller@gmx.ch 2011-08-04 07:16:01 EDT --- Upstream has changed to "clear foundation". There was a lack of activity in the project since then.
Lately they have managed to release a new version:
http://download.clearfoundation.com/l7-filter/l7-filter-userspace-0.12-beta1...
which sadly does not build. I am in contact with upstream to get it running again, and afterwards will continue to work on the package
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=526265
Bug 526265 depends on bug 526263, which changed state.
Bug 526263 Summary: Review Request: l7-protocols - Protocol definitions files for l7-filter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526263
What |Old Value |New Value ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|NOTABUG | Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED
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=526265
Marcus Moeller marcus.moeller@gmx.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | Keywords| |Reopened
--- Comment #11 from Marcus Moeller marcus.moeller@gmx.ch 2011-08-04 11:04:33 EDT --- Patches have been applied:
http://www.marcusmoeller.ch/share/build/l7-filter-userspace/0.12-0.1.beta1/l... http://www.marcusmoeller.ch/share/build/l7-filter-userspace/0.12-0.1.beta1/l...
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=526265
Marcus Moeller marcus.moeller@gmx.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) |
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org