[Bug 528332] Review Request: GNUnet - Secure peer-to-peer networking framework

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=528332





--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kahl <akahl at imttechnologies.com>  2009-11-20 05:43:52 EDT ---
Spec URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/GNUnet/GNUnet.spec
SRPM URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/GNUnet/GNUnet-0.8.0c-1.fc12.src.rpm

> A first check after a mock build yields:
> GNUnet.src: W: strange-permission gnunetd.init 0755
> Can be solved by setting that file to chmod 644 and installing it with install
> -m 755 instead of using cp.
Hmm odd. Done.

> GNUnet.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/gnunetd
Done. Also added "Requires: logrotate".

> GNUnet.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Default-Stop in /etc/rc.d/init.d/gnunetd
This is a false positive and even contradicts with the guidelines:
"Each Fedora SysV-style initscript which needs to start by default in any
runlevel must include this line in the LSB Header (if the # Default-Start: line
is present, then there must also be a # Default-Stop: line.). If the service
does not start by default in any runlevel, this line should be omitted."
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SysVInitScript#.23_Default-Stop:_line)

There is no Default-Start contrary to what rpmlint utters and there should
never
be for GNUnet:
"(Default-Start:) Only services which are really required for a vital system
should define runlevels here."
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SysVInitScript#.23_Default-Start:_line)

> GNUnet.x86_64: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/gnunetd $prog
rpmlint is just too stupid to interpolate sh variables - if you replace all
instances of $prog with its value ("gnunetd"), the warning vanishes. The
line in question should be:
lockfile=/var/lock/subsys/$prog

Really want me to change that?


> I also get a flood of GNUnet.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency when
> running rpmlint on the installed packages. Please check this as well.
Looks like all dload'able plugins are linked against the same set of so:s;
definitely an issue for upstream. Shall I report to upstream first to have this
fixed? Should be an issue of splitting up some Makefile.am:s.

> Furthermore please add comments to the patches as to where they come from and
> if they have been brought to upstream's notice at some point (bugzilla etc.).
All patches written by myself;
patch0: GNUnet build assumes postgres includes use the "postgresql" prefix
which
        is not true for Fedora.
patch1: GNUnet build assumes Qt4's moc and uic preprocessing tools to be
        available under that name but for Fedora it's moc-qt4 and uic-qt4.
patch2: GNUnet build assumes dialog's headers to be in $prefix/include but for
        Fedora it uses a prefix with the same name (dialog).
patch3: This fixes really a GNUnet bug naming cpp defines wrong when using
        dialog, for cdialog the bug is not present but cdialog is not available
        for Fedora.
patch4: This one is also a real bug where GNUnet's plugin path is always
assumed
        to be $prefix/lib/GNUnet despite $plugindir being used in other places
        correctly which is expanded to the arch-dependent lib dir at build
time.

For patches 0-2 we have to find out whether Fedora uses file locations and
names
from the vanilla build of postgres, Qt4 and dialog; in this case, upstream most
probably uses Debian-specific locations and names (seems to be their primary
development distro) so it'd be their issue. In any other case, the problem is
ours and subject of further investigation with the corresponding packages'
maintainers.
The problem addressed by patch4 *could* be caused by Debian-specific behavior
of
GNUnet, do you know whether Debian uses /usr/lib for plugins independent from
installed architecture?

Patch3 is obviously an issue for upstream.

Shall we fix the upstream-related stuff before proceeding any further? I can
report everything after investigation.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.