© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
a60fb26
(Get the code!)
Review for Package: pkgconf
[Summary]
MIR team ACK under the constraint to resolve the below listed
required TODOs and as much as possible having a look at the
recommended TODOs.
This does not need a security review
List of specific binary packages to be promoted to main: pkgconf, libpkgconf3, pkgconf-bin, libpkgconf-dev, pkg-config
Notes:
Please address/clarify the following :
Required TODOs:
1. Does it run autopkgtests ? There is a test suite in the sources which runs at build time,
that could be also run as autopkg, but I do not see anything under
https:/
https:/
Recommended TODOs:
2. Debian has bumped version to 1.8.1. There is a very recent cve, CVE-2023-24056 :
https:/
This cve is addressed upstream
(https:/
and pull into debian in 1.8.1
(https:/
It would be nice to either sync from debian or at least backport the cve fix.
3. The source package produces 5 binaries one of them being pkg-config, which iiuc is transitional
package, can you please clarify if we need it in main too ?
- The package should get a team bug subscriber before being promoted
[Duplication]
pkgconf is a replacment for pkg-config, since debian moved to it.
[Dependencies]
OK
- no other Dependencies to MIR due to this
- pkgconf checked with `check-mir`
- all dependencies can be found in `seeded-in-ubuntu` (already in main)
- none of the (potentially auto-generated) dependencies (Depends
and Recommends) that are present after build are not in main
- no -dev/-debug/-doc packages that need exclusion
- No dependencies in main that are only superficially tested requiring
more tests now.
Problems: None
[Embedded sources and static linking]
OK:
- no embedded source present
- no static linking
- does not have unexpected Built-Using entries
- not a go package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard
- Does not include vendored code
Problems: None
[Security]
OK:
- history of CVEs does not look concerning
- does not run a daemon as root
- does not use webkit1,2
- does not use lib*v8 directly
- does not parse data formats (files [images, video, audio,
xml, json, asn.1], network packets, structures, ...) from
an untrusted source.
- does not open a port/socket
- does not process arbitrary web content
- does not use centralized online accounts
- does not integrate arbitrary javascript into the desktop
- does not deal with system authentication (eg, pam), etc)
- does not deal with security attestation (secure boot, tpm, signatures)
- does not deal with cryptography (en-/decryption, certificates, signing, ...)
Problems: None
[Common blockers]
OK:
- does not FTBFS currently
- does have a test suite that runs at build time
- test suite fails will fail the build upon error.
- This does not need special HW for build or test
- no new python2 dependency
Problems:
- does it have a test suite that runs as autopkgtest ?
[Packaging red flags]
OK:
- Ubuntu does carry a delta, but it is reasonable and maintenance under
control
- symbols tracking is in place
- d/watch is present and looks ok (if needed, e.g. non-native)
- Upstream update history is good
- Debian/Ubuntu update history is good
- the current release is packaged
- promoting this does not seem to cause issues for MOTUs that so far
maintained the package
- no massive Lintian warnings
- d/rules is rather clean
- It is not on the lto-disabled list
Problems: None
[Upstream red flags]
OK:
- no Errors/warnings during the build
- no incautious use of malloc/sprintf (as far as we can check it)
- no use of sudo, gksu, pkexec, or LD_LIBRARY_PATH (usage is OK inside
tests)
- no use of user nobody
- no use of setuid
- no important open bugs (crashers, etc) in Debian or Ubuntu
- no dependency on webkit, qtwebkit, seed or libgoa-*
- not part of the UI for extra checks
- no translation present, but none needed for this case (user visible)?
Problems: None