[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart - checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017

Marc Dequènes (Duck)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|POST|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
Last Closed||2017-10-04 13:59:37



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart - checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #15 from Gwyn Ciesla  ---
(fedrepo-req-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/needrestart

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart - checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #14 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
The tool is picky about the title format too.

Request done, thanks :-).

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart - checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017

Marc Dequènes (Duck)  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|Review Request: needrestart |Review Request: needrestart
   |-- checks which daemons |- checks which daemons need
   |need to be restarted after  |to be restarted after
   |library upgrades|library upgrades



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #13 from Matthias Runge  ---
done, sorry for the inconvenience.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017

Matthias Runge  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|fedora-review?  |fedora-review+



-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #12 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
$ fedrepo-req needrestart -t 1491017
Error: The Bugzilla bug is not approved yet

Could you have a look please?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #11 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
Taking care of the latest fixes.

Thanks a lot :-).

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017

Matthias Runge  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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017

Matthias Runge  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|POST



--- Comment #10 from Matthias Runge  ---
Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- Dist tag is present.


= 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: "GPL (v2)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 35
 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
 /home/mrunge/review/1491017-needrestart/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
 Note: Dirs in package are owned also by:
 /usr/share/polkit-1/actions(polkit, systemd), /usr/lib/python3.6/site-
 packages/dnf-plugins(python3-dnf), /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages
 (system-python-libs), /usr/share/polkit-1(polkit, systemd),
 /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/dnf-plugins/__pycache__(python3-dnf)
[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.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-]: The spec file handles locales properly.
[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.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
 (~1MB) or number of files.
 Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 7 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]: Package installs properly.
[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]: 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]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[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

Perl:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires and Requires:.
 Note: Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`%{__perl} -V:version`";
 echo $version)) missing?

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.
[x]: 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 

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #9 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
SPEC:
https://gitlab.com/osas/osas-infra-team-rpm-pkg/raw/needrestart-2.11-5/needrestart/needrestart.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/duck/osas-infra-team-rpm-repo/epel-7-x86_64/00608855-needrestart/needrestart-2.11-5.src.rpm

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #8 from Matthias Runge  ---
Ok, in my first review, I've missed a missing dependency to python3-dnf,
because of copying content to /usr/lib/python3.6/site-packages/dnf-plugins/
(owned by python3-dnf)

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #7 from Matthias Runge  ---
I'm using a tool named fedora-review.

Calling it 
fedora-review -b 1491017 
(-b is bug number) it will parse this page here for the last "SPEC:" and the
last "SRPM:" line as in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017#c3
, pull down the files linked by that URL and will run a set of tests on that,
like building the package, and running rpmlint on built packages, will simulate
to install the package etc.

yum provides the directory /etc/yum/pluginconf.d (and a set of files). You
should not place a file in a directory, which is currently unowned. In theory,
all system provided directories and files are being kept in rpm inventory (or
the other way around, everything else is user content). RPM also "knows" a
checksum of those files and can check, if a file was changed.

You can not remove yum (and dnf, and a set of other packages), because it's
protected.

For the executable flags in /etc/needrestart, please add your explanation from
above to the %files section as a comment. That should be enough.

As first step in order to test your submission, you probably want to add a new
spec and srpm line to the bz ticket.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #6 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
-4 has the changelog updated. Waiting for answers for the rest.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #5 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
Thanks for taking time to review.

Yes I do rebuild with the final release number. I'm tagging releases and I plan
to split the repository to get on building on push while this one would build
on tags only. It's not just done yet.

Which tool do you use to get this lint-ing? I tried rpmlint but it was not
really helpful, suggesting changes incompatible with the Fedora guidelines.

How is the dependency on yum helping? Is there some code in YUM changing
behavior because of it? Because if I need to remove YUM, if we suppose someone
would like to use some alternative instead, it end-up with:
  Error: Trying to remove "yum", which is protected
So I don't see how YUM could me missing. Same for DNF I guess.

As for executable files, The 'README.needrestart' files in
/etc/needrestart/restart.d/ and /etc/needrestart/notify.d/ explicitly say the
files will only be considered if they are executables. There's nothing said for
/etc/needrestart/hook.d/ but I guess this is the same logic.

\_o<

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #4 from Matthias Runge  ---
Please make sure, spec in -3 and the srpm are actually the same version.

Then:
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/hook.d/10-dpkg
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/hook.d/20-rpm
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/hook.d/30-pacman
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/hook.d/90-none
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/notify.d/200-write
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/notify.d/400-notify-send
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/notify.d/600-mail
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/restart.d/auditd.service
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/restart.d/dbus.service
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/restart.d/systemd-manager
needrestart.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/needrestart/restart.d/sysv-init


Please remove the executable flags from those files.

- in order to prevent unowned directories, you'll need to add a dependency to
yum itself, see
rpm -qf /etc/yum/pluginconf.d

- please also add an empty line between changelog entries in order to enhance
readability.

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017

Matthias Runge  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||mru...@redhat.com
   Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mru...@redhat.com
  Flags||fedora-review?



--- Comment #3 from Matthias Runge  ---
Adding a reference to raw files in order to make fedora-review work directly.

SPEC:
https://gitlab.com/osas/osas-infra-team-rpm-pkg/raw/master/needrestart/needrestart.spec
SRPM URL:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/duck/osas-infra-team-rpm-repo/epel-7-x86_64/00601454-needrestart/needrestart-2.11-1.src.rpm

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #2 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
I fixed a few thing in -3 version. Could someone have a look please?

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017



--- Comment #1 from Marc Dequènes (Duck)  ---
When you install needrestart, it's a commitment for *life*. Any attempt would
result in a crash. Joking :-).

So I fixed the YUM and DNF plugins to detect the situation and handle it
gracefully.


Btw, I'm still in need of a reviewer and a sponsor. o-negai itashimasu!

-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1491017] Review Request: needrestart -- checks which daemons need to be restarted after library upgrades

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1491017

Marc Dequènes (Duck)  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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org