Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 1902498 - Review Request: efifs - Free software EFI/UEFI standalone file system drivers
Summary: Review Request: efifs - Free software EFI/UEFI standalone file system drivers
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Robert-André Mauchin 🐧
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-11-29 17:33 UTC by Robert Scheck
Modified: 2021-02-14 01:17 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-02-07 01:33:02 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:
zebob.m: fedora-review+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Robert Scheck 2020-11-29 17:33:09 UTC 
Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/efifs.spec
SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/efifs-1.7-2.src.rpm
Description: Free software EFI/UEFI standalone file system drivers, based on the GRUB 2.0 read-only drivers: AFFS (Amiga Fast FileSystem), BFS (BeOS FileSystem), btrfs, exFAT, ext2/ext3/ext4, F2FS (experimental), HFS and HFS+ (Mac OS, including the compression support), ISO9660, JFS (Journaled FileSystem), nilfs2, NTFS (including compression support), ReiserFS, SFS (Amiga Smart FileSystem), UDF, UFS/FFS, UFS2/FFS2, XFS, ZFS and more.
Fedora Account System Username: robert
Comment 1 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2021-01-25 18:50:23 UTC 
Package approved.

Package Review
==============

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


Issues:
=======
- Permissions on files are set properly.
  Note: See rpmlint output
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/#_file_permissions


===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.

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: "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later", "Unknown or
     generated", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later [generated
     file]", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License GNU General Public License
     v2.0 or later", "[generated file]", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised"
     License", "GNU Free Documentation License v1.2 or later", "Expat
     License", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later", "*No copyright*
     Public domain", "Public domain", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or
     later [obsolete FSF postal address (Mass Ave)]", "GNU General Public
     License", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License GNU General Public
     License v3.0 or later", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later
     [obsolete FSF postal address (Mass Ave)]", "BSD 3-clause "New" or
     "Revised" License GNU General Public License v3.0 or later", "BSD
     3-clause "New" or "Revised" License GNU General Public License,
     Version 2", "GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later [obsolete
     FSF postal address (Temple Place)]", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified"
     License", "ISC License BSD 4-clause "Original" or "Old" License",
     "OpenSSL License", "Apple MIT License", "GNU Library General Public
     License v2 or later", "BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License GNU General
     Public License v2.0 or later [obsolete FSF postal address (Temple
     Place)]", "GNU General Public License v2.0 or later [obsolete FSF
     postal address (Temple Place)]", "*No copyright* Expat License", "GNU
     Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later", "Public domain GNU
     Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later", "GNU Lesser General
     Public License". 8115 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/efifs/review-
     efifs/licensecheck.txt
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[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.
[-]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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 20480 bytes in 3 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: 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]: 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

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: 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).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
     translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
     $RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

Generic:
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: efifs-1.7-2.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          efifs-1.7-2.fc34.src.rpm
efifs.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US exFAT -> ex Fat, expat, ex-fat
efifs.x86_64: E: no-binary
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/affs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/affs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/afs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/afs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/bfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/bfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/btrfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/btrfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/cbfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/cbfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/cpio.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/cpio.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/cpio_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/cpio_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/exfat.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/exfat.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ext2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ext2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/f2fs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/f2fs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/fat.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/fat.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/hfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/hfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/hfsplus.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/hfsplus.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/iso9660.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/iso9660.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/jfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/jfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix2_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix2_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix3.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix3.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix3_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix3_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/minix_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/newc.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/newc.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/nilfs2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/nilfs2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ntfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ntfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/odc.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/odc.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/procfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/procfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/reiserfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/reiserfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/romfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/romfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/sfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/sfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/squash4.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/squash4.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/tar.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/tar.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/udf.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/udf.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ufs1.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ufs1.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ufs1_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ufs1_be.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ufs2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/ufs2.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/xfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/xfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-readable /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/zfs.efi 700
efifs.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /boot/efi/EFI/efifs/zfs.efi 700
efifs.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US exFAT -> ex Fat, expat, ex-fat
efifs.src:41: W: unversioned-explicit-provides echo
efifs.src:41: W: unversioned-explicit-provides ${c:0:7})
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 76 errors, 4 warnings.
Comment 2 Fedora Update System 2021-01-29 20:34:07 UTC 
FEDORA-2021-2083ac362d has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-2083ac362d
Comment 3 Fedora Update System 2021-01-29 20:34:08 UTC 
FEDORA-2021-ce818f7759 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ce818f7759
Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2021-01-29 20:34:08 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4eb735a9d7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4eb735a9d7
Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2021-01-30 01:29:38 UTC 
FEDORA-2021-2083ac362d has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-2083ac362d \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-2083ac362d

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2021-01-30 02:11:34 UTC 
FEDORA-2021-ce818f7759 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-ce818f7759 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-ce818f7759

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2021-01-30 02:16:39 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4eb735a9d7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4eb735a9d7

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2021-02-07 01:33:02 UTC 
FEDORA-2021-2083ac362d has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2021-02-07 01:38:58 UTC 
FEDORA-2021-ce818f7759 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2021-02-14 01:17:01 UTC 
FEDORA-EPEL-2021-4eb735a9d7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.