[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- testcloud-0.1.7-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2016-01-14 03:55:26 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Miroslav Suchý changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Mike Ruckman changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) --- Comment #1 from Mike Ruckman --- This is the first package I've submitted, so I'll need a sponsor. I'm also the upstream maintainer of this package. I don't have much experience with packaging, but I'm active on the QA side of things and would like to get more involved. Link to a successful copr build: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/roshi/testCloud/builds/ Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo --- wellcome there are two issues in the spec file 1. in install section rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT should be removed 2. %doc README.rst LICENSE you should use: %doc README.rst %license LICENSE thanks for your work -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #3 from Mike Ruckman --- Thanks! Updated :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group)
---
> # sitelib for noarch packages, sitearch for others (remove the unneeded one)
> BuildArch: noarch
Notice the hint in brackets.
> Requires: libvirt
> Requires: libguestfs
> Requires: libguestfs-tools
> Requires: python-requests
Explicit Requires benefit from a comment that explains the dependency. Without
such comments, packagers sometimes remove dependencies accidentally.
> %dir %{_sysconfdir}/testcloud
> %dir %attr(777, root, root) %{_sharedstatedir}/testcloud/cache
> %dir %attr(777, root, root) %{_sharedstatedir}/testcloud/instances
>
> %{_sysconfdir}/testcloud/settings.p*
Directory %{_sharedstatedir}/testcloud/ is not included yet:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
What is the reason to make the directories *world-writable*? The README doesn't
give a rationale either, but just says "any permitted user" which is anyone for
a world-writable dir.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions
> %{_sysconfdir}/testcloud/settings.p*
Its default contents refer to /var/lib/testCloud/ with a different and
misleading uppercase 'C' in the spelling.
> /usr/bin/testcloud
> %{python_sitelib}/testcloud/init.py
Both define version 0.0.1 while the package claims it is 0.1.0.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649
--- Comment #5 from Mike Ruckman ---
(In reply to Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) from comment #4)
> > # sitelib for noarch packages, sitearch for others (remove the unneeded one)
>
> > BuildArch: noarch
>
> Notice the hint in brackets.
>
Fixed.
>
> > Requires: libvirt
> > Requires: libguestfs
> > Requires: libguestfs-tools
> > Requires: python-requests
>
> Explicit Requires benefit from a comment that explains the dependency.
> Without such comments, packagers sometimes remove dependencies accidentally.
>
Added comments for each of the requires.
>
> > %dir %{_sysconfdir}/testcloud
> > %dir %attr(777, root, root) %{_sharedstatedir}/testcloud/cache
> > %dir %attr(777, root, root) %{_sharedstatedir}/testcloud/instances
> >
> > %{_sysconfdir}/testcloud/settings.p*
>
> Directory %{_sharedstatedir}/testcloud/ is not included yet:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:
> Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
>
Thanks for catching this. I didn't know I needed to be that explicit, I thought
claiming the other dirs was enough.
> What is the reason to make the directories *world-writable*? The README
> doesn't give a rationale either, but just says "any permitted user" which is
> anyone for a world-writable dir.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions
>
This one I'm not sure how to figure out. Getting permissions ironed out for
this has been a pain so far - so I welcome any ideas :) As for the
world-writeable permissions I was using, it allowed anyone to run the tool and
download images to those directories. I've tested a couple other permissions
sets and haven't found something that works.
What's the best way to solve this? The user fires off a command that downloads
the image (as that user), then virsh and friends take over, which need to be
able to manipulate that directory. Would giving permissions to the qemu group
be a better fit?
>
> > %{_sysconfdir}/testcloud/settings.p*
>
> Its default contents refer to /var/lib/testCloud/ with a different and
> misleading uppercase 'C' in the spelling.
>
Thanks, thought I'd caught all the capitals (the old name was testCloud - but
decided to change it before release).
>
> > /usr/bin/testcloud
> > %{python_sitelib}/testcloud/init.py
>
> Both define version 0.0.1 while the package claims it is 0.1.0.
Again, thought I'd caught everything that needed updating in the code. It's
fixed now, thanks!
Once I get the permissions ironed out I'll update the srpm and spec file online
for you to take a look at.
Thanks again!
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) --- > Getting permissions ironed out for this has been a pain so far - > so I welcome any ideas :) > What's the best way to solve this? More elegant, more ordinary and more expected would be to set up a local tree in user's $HOME and to work within that space. What else have you tried that hasn't worked? It seems simplification has gone too far, if users operate in a world-writable directory below /var/lib. It could be an idea to open a thread on devel@ list, mention any specific requirements there are, and ask for comments. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Kamil Páral changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kpa...@redhat.com --- Comment #7 from Kamil Páral --- Out of curiosity, why is /var/lib/testcloud/cache used for cache dir instead of /var/cache/testcloud ? If I'm running out of space and I want to delete some caches, the latter location is expected and probably the first place where the user will look for such files. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #8 from Mike Ruckman --- (In reply to Michael Schwendt (Fedora Packager Sponsors Group) from comment #6) > > Getting permissions ironed out for this has been a pain so far - > > so I welcome any ideas :) > > > What's the best way to solve this? > > More elegant, more ordinary and more expected would be to set up a local > tree in user's $HOME and to work within that space. What else have you tried > that hasn't worked? It seems simplification has gone too far, if users > operate in a world-writable directory below /var/lib. We've tried to put this directory tree in $HOME, but libvirt doesn't play well with data in a home directory, since it has to own all the images it works with. Libvirt already keeps it's images in /var/lib - so it seemed a logical place to put them in this case. In the case of the permissions, the user running the script needs to have write access to that directory in order to download images for libvirt to use. We're currently revisiting this to see if there's a viable approach for our use case. (In reply to Kamil Páral from comment #7) > Out of curiosity, why is /var/lib/testcloud/cache used for cache dir instead > of /var/cache/testcloud ? If I'm running out of space and I want to delete > some caches, the latter location is expected and probably the first place > where the user will look for such files. I suppose the name "cache" is a bit misleading in a system context. Originally, testcloud downloaded the image for your instance each time you launched an instance. This made everything take a lot longer to run, wasted bandwidth and disk space. So I started to cache the images, and use them as backing stores for instances; saving disk space and bandwidth. In your case, if you were to delete images from what is now /var/lib/testcloud/cache it would break any instances using those as a backing store. I've opened a ticket in phab [0] to make the name change on that directory to better communicate what it contains. [0] https://phab.qadevel.cloud.fedoraproject.org/T521 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #9 from Mike Ruckman --- I've updated the package to get rid of the world writeable directory [0]. The spec file can be seen here [1]. In order to get permissions to work, I had to create a testcloud group (the user has to add themselves to this group), and add a polkit rule so that users can manage instances over ssh. [0] https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/roshi/testCloud/build/104053/ [1] https://roshi.fedorapeople.org/packages/testcloud.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #10 from Tim Flink --- testcloud has been updated to a new version that doesn't subprocess virt-install calls to do installation. I'm not Mike but I am a co-maintainer of testcloud https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/roshi/testCloud/build/140592/ https://tflink.fedorapeople.org/packages/testcloud/testcloud.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Adam Miller changed: What|Removed |Added CC||admil...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|admil...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649
--- Comment #11 from Adam Miller ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
- Permissions on files are set properly.
Note: See rpmlint output
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#FilePermissions
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated". 28 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in
/home/admiller/reviews/testcloud/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be download
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #12 from Adam Miller --- If you still need a Fedora Packager Sponsor, I would be happy to sponsor you. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #13 from Tim Flink --- For the template errors, testcloud isn't a GUI application and thus, doesn't need a desktop file unless I'm misunderstanding something. Can you give a few more details about the installation error? I can't reproduce the issue locally and I'm not really sure what's wrong. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #14 from Adam Miller --- Apologies on the desktop file mark, that was an oversight on my part. The install failure was from attempting to install in a rawhide mock chroot, which I can no longer reproduce either (the machine I did the original build/review on got re-installed over the past weekend from Fedora 22 to Fedora 23). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #15 from Tim Flink --- I've updated the specfile and code per review comments. https://tflink.fedorapeople.org/packages/testcloud/testcloud.spec https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/roshi/testCloud/build/144587/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Adam Miller changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #16 from Adam Miller --- APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #17 from Jon Ciesla --- Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/testcloud -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- testcloud-0.1.7-1.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-3b22b49d3a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- testcloud-0.1.7-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 22. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-f632781616 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1234649] Review Request: testcloud - a small tool for running cloud images locally
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1234649 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System --- testcloud-0.1.7-1.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with $ su -c 'dnf --enablerepo=updates-testing update testcloud' You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2015-3b22b49d3a -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
