Sign me up Login

Details about package wolfssl

Name: wolfssl (PTS)
Uploader: Jacob Barthelmeh <sirkilamole@msn.com> (Debian QA page)
Description: libwolfssl42t64 - wolfSSL encryption library
libwolfssl-dev - Development files for the wolfSSL encryption library

Package uploads

Upload #3

Information

Version: 5.7.4-1
Uploaded: 2024-11-08 23:41
Source package: wolfssl_5.7.4-1.dsc
Distribution: unstable
Section: libs
Priority: optional
Homepage: https://www.wolfssl.com/products/wolfssl/

Changelog

 wolfssl (5.7.4-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Fix for version number used

QA information

Comments

  1. Jacob,

Preamble...

Thank you for taking the time to prepare this package and your contribution to the Debian project.

The review below is for assistance. This review is offered to help package submitters to Debian mentors inorder to improve their packages prior to possible sponsorship into Debian. There is no obligation on behalf of the submitter to make any alterations based upon information provided in the review.

Review...

1. Build:

  * pbuilder [1]: Good
  * sbuild [2]: Good

2. Lintian [3]: Issue

Running lintian...
N:
I: wolfssl source: out-of-date-standards-version 4.6.1 (released 2022-05-11) (current is 4.7.0)
N: 
N:   The source package refers to a Standards-Version older than the one that
N:   was current at the time the package was created (according to the
N:   timestamp of the latest debian/changelog entry). Please consider updating
N:   the package to current Policy and setting this control field
N:   appropriately.
N:   
N:   If the package is already compliant with the current standards, you don't
N:   have to re-upload the package just to adjust the Standards-Version control
N:   field. However, please remember to update this field next time you upload
N:   the package.
N:   
N:   See /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.txt.gz in the
N:   debian-policy package for a summary of changes in newer versions of
N:   Policy.
N: 
N:   Please refer to
N:   https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html for
N:   details.
N: 
N:   Visibility: info
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: fields/standards-version
N: 
N:
I: wolfssl source: patch-not-forwarded-upstream [debian/patches/multi-arch.patch]
N: 
N:   According to the DEP-3 headers, this patch has not been forwarded
N:   upstream.
N:   
N:   Please forward the patch and try to have it included in upstream's version
N:   control system. If the patch is not suitable for that, please mention
N:   not-needed in the Forwarded field of the patch header.
N: 
N:   Please refer to social contract item 2, Coordination with upstream
N:   developers (Section 3.1.4) in the Debian Developer's Reference, Changes to
N:   the upstream sources (Section 4.3) in the Debian Policy Manual, and
N:   Bug#755153 for details.
N: 
N:   Visibility: info
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: debian/patches/dep3
N:   Renamed from: send-patch
N: 
N:
I: libwolfssl42t64: unused-override package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libwolfssl42 [usr/share/lintian/overrides/libwolfssl42t64:1]
N: 
N:   Your package specifies the named override but there were no tags that
N:   could have been silenced by it.
N:   
N:   Maybe you fixed an underlying condition but forgot to remove the override.
N:   It is also possible that the Lintian maintainers fixed a false positive.
N:   
N:   If the override is now unused, please remove it.
N:   
N:   This tag is similar to mismatched-override except there a tag could have
N:   been silenced if the context had matched.
N:   
N:   Sometimes, overrides end up not being used because a tag appears only on
N:   some architectures. In that case, overrides can be equipped with an
N:   architecture qualifier.
N: 
N:   Please refer to Architecture specific overrides (Section 2.4.3) in the
N:   Lintian User's Manual for details.
N: 
N:   Visibility: info
N:   Show-Always: yes
N:   Check: lintian
N: 
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN-SRTP-KDF-140-3/resource.h]
N: 
N:   The following file is autogenerated by Microsoft Visual C++.
N:   
N:   They are usually provided for the convenience of users. These files
N:   usually just take up space in the tarball and are of no use in Debian.
N:   
N:   Check if upstream also provides source-only tarballs that you can use as
N:   the upstream distribution instead. If not, you may want to ask upstream to
N:   provide source-only tarballs.
N: 
N:   Visibility: pedantic
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: cruft
N: 
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN-SRTP-KDF-140-3/wolfssl-fips.rc]
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN10/resource.h]
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN10/wolfssl-fips.rc]
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [resource.h]
N:
P: wolfssl source: trailing-whitespace [debian/changelog:97]
N: 
N:   This file contains lines with trailing whitespace characters.
N:   
N:   Whilst often harmless and unsightly, such extra whitespaces can also cause
N:   tools to interpret the whitespace characters literally. The tool diff(1)
N:   does not like them, either. They are best avoided.
N:   
N:   Some of these problems can be hard to track down.
N:   
N:   Whitespace at the end of lines may be removed with the following:
N:   
N:    $ sed -i -e 's@[[:space:]]*$@@g' debian/control debian/changelog
N:   
N:   If you use Emacs, you can also use "M-x wh-cl" (whitespace-cleanup).
N:   
N:   However, if you wish to only remove trailing spaces and leave trailing
N:   tabs (eg. for Makefiles), you can use the following code snippet:
N:   
N:    $ sed -i -e 's@[ ]*$@@g' debian/rules
N:   
N:   To remove empty lines from the end of a file, you can use:
N:   
N:    $ sed -i -e :a -e '/^\n*$/{$d;N;};/\n$/ba' debian/rules
N: 
N:   Visibility: pedantic
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: debian/trailing-whitespace
N:   Renamed from: file-contains-trailing-whitespace
N: 
N: 0 hints overridden; 1 unused override

I: Lintian run was successful.

3. Licenses [4]: Good

4. Watch file [uscan --force-download]: Good

5. Build Twice [sudo pbuilder build --twice <package>.dsc]: Good

6. Reproducible builds [5]: Good

7. Install [No previous installs]: Good

8. Upgrade [Over previous installs if any]: Good

Summary...

Good work, just a few lintian issues to look at and address.

I believe wolfssl is not yet ready for sponsorship at this time. Could the contributor rectify one of more of the raised issues.

Regards

Phil

[1] pbuilder:

  * Command: sudo pbuilder build <PACKAGE>.dsc
  * Document: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto.
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/PbuilderTricks

[2] sbuild:

  * Command: sbuild <PACKAGE>.dsc
  * Document: https://wiki.kathenas.org/pmwiki.php/Kathenas/Article00000002
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild

[3] lintian:

  * Command: lintian -v -i -I -E --pedantic --profile debian (*.dsc, *.changes, *.buildinfo). Each can throw up different results, so be thorough.
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/Lintian

[4] lrc:

  * Command: lrc
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools#licenserecon

[5] reprotest

  * Command: sudo reprotest --vary=-build_path,domain_host.use_sudo=1 --auto-build <PACKAGE>.dsc -- schroot unstable-amd64-sbuild
  * Document: https://wiki.kathenas.org/pmwiki.php/Kathenas/Article00000004
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Howto#Newer_method
    Needs work Phil Wyett at Nov. 9, 2024, 7:21 a.m. 
  2. Jacob,

Do you have intention to impart wolfssl into Debian's Salsa?

Many DD's work only out of Salsa and will not work with uploaded packages. I encourage you to have wolfsssl in Salsa.

Other advantage, you can file RFS bugs then only and point them to the Salsa repo. Saves time. :-)

Regards

Phil
    Needs work Phil Wyett at Nov. 9, 2024, 7:25 a.m.

Upload #2

Information

Version: 5.7.4-0.1
Uploaded: 2024-10-29 22:41
Source package: wolfssl_5.7.4-0.1.dsc
Distribution: unstable
Section: libs
Priority: optional
Homepage: https://www.wolfssl.com/products/wolfssl/

Changelog

 wolfssl (5.7.4-0.1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * New upstream release

QA information

Comments

  1. Jacob,

You are the package maintainer so need to do the -0.1 it can be -1.
    Needs work Phil Wyett at Oct. 31, 2024, 7:05 a.m. 
  2. Jacob,

Preamble...

Thank you for taking the time to prepare this package and your contribution to the Debian project.

The review below is for assistance. This review is offered to help package submitters to Debian mentors inorder to improve their packages prior to possible sponsorship into Debian. There is no obligation on behalf of the submitter to make any alterations based upon information provided in the review.

Review...

1. Build:

  * pbuilder [1]: Good
  * sbuild [2]: Good

2. Lintian [3]: Issue

Running lintian...
N:
W: wolfssl source: maintainer-upload-has-incorrect-version-number 5.7.4-0.1 [debian/changelog:1]
N: 
N:   A maintainer upload should have a Debian revision without dots. Revisions
N:   with dots are reserved for Non-Maintainer Uploads (NMUs). If you do a
N:   maintainer-upload with dots a potential NMU'er has problems choosing a
N:   correct version number.
N: 
N:   Visibility: warning
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: nmu
N: 
N:
I: wolfssl source: out-of-date-standards-version 4.6.1 (released 2022-05-11) (current is 4.7.0)
N: 
N:   The source package refers to a Standards-Version older than the one that
N:   was current at the time the package was created (according to the
N:   timestamp of the latest debian/changelog entry). Please consider updating
N:   the package to current Policy and setting this control field
N:   appropriately.
N:   
N:   If the package is already compliant with the current standards, you don't
N:   have to re-upload the package just to adjust the Standards-Version control
N:   field. However, please remember to update this field next time you upload
N:   the package.
N:   
N:   See /usr/share/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.txt.gz in the
N:   debian-policy package for a summary of changes in newer versions of
N:   Policy.
N: 
N:   Please refer to
N:   https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html for
N:   details.
N: 
N:   Visibility: info
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: fields/standards-version
N: 
N:
I: libwolfssl42t64: unused-override package-name-doesnt-match-sonames libwolfssl42 [usr/share/lintian/overrides/libwolfssl42t64:1]
N: 
N:   Your package specifies the named override but there were no tags that
N:   could have been silenced by it.
N:   
N:   Maybe you fixed an underlying condition but forgot to remove the override.
N:   It is also possible that the Lintian maintainers fixed a false positive.
N:   
N:   If the override is now unused, please remove it.
N:   
N:   This tag is similar to mismatched-override except there a tag could have
N:   been silenced if the context had matched.
N:   
N:   Sometimes, overrides end up not being used because a tag appears only on
N:   some architectures. In that case, overrides can be equipped with an
N:   architecture qualifier.
N: 
N:   Please refer to Architecture specific overrides (Section 2.4.3) in the
N:   Lintian User's Manual for details.
N: 
N:   Visibility: info
N:   Show-Always: yes
N:   Check: lintian
N: 
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN-SRTP-KDF-140-3/resource.h]
N: 
N:   The following file is autogenerated by Microsoft Visual C++.
N:   
N:   They are usually provided for the convenience of users. These files
N:   usually just take up space in the tarball and are of no use in Debian.
N:   
N:   Check if upstream also provides source-only tarballs that you can use as
N:   the upstream distribution instead. If not, you may want to ask upstream to
N:   provide source-only tarballs.
N: 
N:   Visibility: pedantic
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: cruft
N: 
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN-SRTP-KDF-140-3/wolfssl-fips.rc]
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN10/resource.h]
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [IDE/WIN10/wolfssl-fips.rc]
N:
P: wolfssl source: source-contains-autogenerated-visual-c++-file [resource.h]
N:
P: wolfssl source: trailing-whitespace [debian/changelog:91]
N: 
N:   This file contains lines with trailing whitespace characters.
N:   
N:   Whilst often harmless and unsightly, such extra whitespaces can also cause
N:   tools to interpret the whitespace characters literally. The tool diff(1)
N:   does not like them, either. They are best avoided.
N:   
N:   Some of these problems can be hard to track down.
N:   
N:   Whitespace at the end of lines may be removed with the following:
N:   
N:    $ sed -i -e 's@[[:space:]]*$@@g' debian/control debian/changelog
N:   
N:   If you use Emacs, you can also use "M-x wh-cl" (whitespace-cleanup).
N:   
N:   However, if you wish to only remove trailing spaces and leave trailing
N:   tabs (eg. for Makefiles), you can use the following code snippet:
N:   
N:    $ sed -i -e 's@[ ]*$@@g' debian/rules
N:   
N:   To remove empty lines from the end of a file, you can use:
N:   
N:    $ sed -i -e :a -e '/^\n*$/{$d;N;};/\n$/ba' debian/rules
N: 
N:   Visibility: pedantic
N:   Show-Always: no
N:   Check: debian/trailing-whitespace
N:   Renamed from: file-contains-trailing-whitespace
N: 
N: 0 hints overridden; 1 unused override

I: Lintian run was successful.

3. Licenses [4]: Good

4. Watch file [uscan --force-download]: Good

5. Build Twice [sudo pbuilder build --twice <package>.dsc]: Good

6. Reproducible builds [5]: Good

7. Install [No previous installs]: Good

8. Upgrade [Over previous installs if any]: Good

Summary...

I believe wolfssl is ready for review/possible sponsorship. Could a Debian Developer (DD) with available free time, please review this package and upload if you feel it is ready.

Regards

Phil

[1] pbuilder:

  * Command: sudo pbuilder build <PACKAGE>.dsc
  * Document: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto.
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/PbuilderTricks

[2] sbuild:

  * Command: sbuild <PACKAGE>.dsc
  * Document: https://wiki.kathenas.org/pmwiki.php/Kathenas/Article00000002
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild

[3] lintian:

  * Command: lintian -v -i -I -E --pedantic --profile debian (*.dsc, *.changes, *.buildinfo). Each can throw up different results, so be thorough.
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/Lintian

[4] lrc:

  * Command: lrc
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/CopyrightReviewTools#licenserecon

[5] reprotest

  * Command: sudo reprotest --vary=-build_path,domain_host.use_sudo=1 --auto-build <PACKAGE>.dsc -- schroot unstable-amd64-sbuild
  * Document: https://wiki.kathenas.org/pmwiki.php/Kathenas/Article00000004
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/
  * Document: https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Howto#Newer_method
    Needs work Phil Wyett at Oct. 31, 2024, 7:17 a.m. 
  3. Thank you for the feedback on this Phil! I tried uploading a new bundle now.
    Needs work Jacob Barthelmeh at Nov. 8, 2024, 11:34 p.m.

Upload #1

Information

Version: 5.7.2-1
Uploaded: 2024-07-16 17:10
Source package: wolfssl_5.7.2-1.dsc
Distribution: unstable
Section: libs
Priority: optional
Homepage: https://www.wolfssl.com/products/wolfssl/

Changelog

 wolfssl (5.7.2-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * New upstream release.
   * Refresh debian patches

QA information

Comments

  1. Jacob,

Preamble...

Thank you for taking the time to create this package and your contribution
to the Debian project.

The review below is for assistance. This review is offered to help
package submitters to Debian mentors inorder to improve their packages
prior to possible sponsorship into Debian. There is no obligation on behalf
of the submitter to make any alterations based upon information provided
in the review.

Review...

1. Build[1]: Good

2. Lintian[2]: Issue

If possible please update 'Standards-Version' in 'debian/control' to latest 4.7.0 in a future upload.

3. Licenses (lrc[3]): Issue

philwyett@ks-windu:~/Development/builder/debian/mentoring/wolfssl-5.7.2$ lrc
en: Versions: recon 1.11  check 3.3.9-1

Parsing Source Tree  ....
Reading copyright    ....
Running licensecheck ....

d/copyright     | licensecheck

GPL-2+          | GPL              IDE/MSVS-2019-AZSPHERE/wolfssl_new_azsphere/HardwareDefinitions/avnet_mt3620_sk/template_appliance.json
GPL-2+          | GPL              IDE/MSVS-2019-AZSPHERE/wolfssl_new_azsphere/HardwareDefinitions/mt3620_rdb/template_appliance.json
GPL-2+          | GPL              IDE/MSVS-2019-AZSPHERE/wolfssl_new_azsphere/HardwareDefinitions/seeed_mt3620_mdb/template_appliance.json
GPL-2+          | GPL-2            IDE/XilinxSDK/bench.sh
GPL-2+          | GPL-2            IDE/XilinxSDK/combine.sh
GPL-2+          | GPL-2            IDE/XilinxSDK/graph.sh
GPL-2+          | GPL-2            rpm/spec.in
GPL-2+          | GPL-2            scripts/bench/bench_functions.sh

Maybe a quick review to see if all is correct with the above files vs 'debian/copyright'.

4. Watch file (uscan --force-download): Good

5. Build Twice (sudo pbuilder build --twice <package>.dsc): Good

6. Reproducible builds (reporotest)[3]: Good

7. Install (No previous installs): Good

8. Upgrade (Over previous installs if any): Good

Summary...

As always, great work and a sign of your skill and attention to detail.

I believe wolfssl is ready for sponsorship/upload. Could a Debian Developer (DD) with available free time, please review this package and upload if you feel it is ready.

Regards

Phil

[1] Using:
      * pbuilder - https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PbuilderHowto.
      * https://wiki.debian.org/PbuilderTricks
    and
      * sbuild - https://wiki.debian.org/sbuild.

[2] Command: lintian -v -i -I -E --pedantic --profile debian (*.dsc,
    *.changes, *.buildinfo). Each can throw up different, so be thorough.

[3] 'lrc' from 'licenserecon' is located in Debian testing and newer.

[4] https://wiki.debian.org/ReproducibleBuilds/Howto#Newer_method
    Ready Phil Wyett at July 17, 2024, 3:08 a.m. 
  2. Jacob,

This is not likely to get many eyes on it anytime soon. If you were to toggle "Needs a sponsor" and file an RFS bug[1], it will likely be acted upon quicker.

[1] https://mentors.debian.net/sponsors/rfs-howto/

Regards

Phil
    Phil Wyett at July 31, 2024, 5:52 p.m.