Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bad packaging #21

Closed
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Apr 15, 2015 · 9 comments
Closed

bad packaging #21

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Apr 15, 2015 · 9 comments

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

In the file: http://impacket.googlecode.com/files/impacket-0.9.9.9.tar.gz

- Impacket.spec
  - notice how the spec's name doesn't reflect the package name?
    - the case of the leading 'i'/'I' is different
  - %define version 0.9.9.0_dev
    - is not the same version as the "published" package's version (0.9.9.9)
  - %define unmangled_version 0.9.9.0-dev
    - ditto
    - additionally, since the spec is directing rpmbuild to use "{tgz_name}-%{unmangled_version}.tar.gz" (in the Source0 tag) to find the source tarball, it fails since the source is named impacket-0.9.9.9.tar.gz per the "published" version
  - License: UNKNOWN
    - should reflect the actual license of the software
  - %description
    - should provide at least a brief description of the package

All of these errors make it difficult to programmatically build your package 
with the same code that can successfully build any other properly published 
python package such as those found on http://pypi.python.org/.

The unmangled_version fubar makes it actually impossible to build the package 
at all without having to manually correct the Impact.spec file.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by [email protected] on 3 Jan 2013 at 10:06

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Hrm.  Looking at the setup.py for the 0.9.9.9 release it seems that you failed 
to update the setup(version) prior to doing the builds.  This seems to be a 
chronic issue as it appears to be the case on svn/tags/impacket_0_9_8_0/ and 
svn/tags/impacket_0_9_7_0/ also.  You really need to make these things all 
match up.

You cannot simply rename the resulting .tar.gz and expect everything to be good.

Original comment by [email protected] on 3 Jan 2013 at 10:41

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Hey Brian:

Thanks for the report and sorry for the messed up package. We'll be fixing it 
these days.

Stay tunned.


Original comment by [email protected] on 6 Jan 2013 at 6:11

  • Changed state: Accepted

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Original comment by [email protected] on 10 Jan 2013 at 4:34

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Hi.

To be clear, you need to adjust the version in setup.py to reflect what you 
want the resulting release to ship as, before you do the release process so 
that things are all named/versioned correctly.  I would suggest that that 
version given should match the release branch/tag name.

Original comment by [email protected] on 10 Jan 2013 at 4:53

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

I've modified some of the properties of the setup.py file. This new version is 
attached, does this modifications fix the issues you have to create the package.

Original comment by [email protected] on 10 Jan 2013 at 7:17

Attachments:

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Well, that setup.py is fine if what you want as a result is 
impacket-0.9.9.9.tar.gz.  But you have already released 0.9.9.9 at:

http://corelabs.coresecurity.com/index.php?module=Wiki&action=attachment&type=to
ol&page=Impacket&file=impacket-0.9.9.9.tar.gz

Surely you don't actually want to re-release 0.9.9.9 right?  If you don't, then 
you need to decide what the version of the next release will be and set the 
version property to that value.

Currently on trunk the version is 1.0.0.0-dev.  That seems like a reasonable 
version while trunk is in development given that the previous release was 
0.9.9.9.  But at the point where you are ready to do an official release, you 
would want to set that version to "1.0.0.0" so that the tarball you get is 
impacket-1.0.0.0.tar.gz (the zip file will be similar).  It's that tarball (and 
zip file) that you make available as your release to your users, _WITHOUT_ 
doing anything to them to change the version in their name.  That's the 
important part.  Once "setup bdist" (or whatever variant you use) has created 
and named the tarball and/or zip files, you cannot change the version (nor 
should you really change the name) in the file name.

Original comment by [email protected] on 22 Jan 2013 at 8:13

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Additionally at the point in the source tree where you did the "setup bdist" to 
make your 1.0.0.0 release (with the setup.py version="1.0.0.0" you would create 
a tag "impacket_1_0_0_0" so that you have perfect alignment of setup.py 
version= value, the names on the released packages and the SCCS tag.

Original comment by [email protected] on 22 Jan 2013 at 8:15

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

Hey Brian..

Thanks for all your points.. we will not be changing 0.9.9.9 since, as you 
said, it's already out there. 

We will incorporate these changes whenever we release the next version.

thanks again,
beto

Original comment by [email protected] on 25 Jan 2013 at 8:14

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

We just published 0.9.10.. Hopefully those problems are solved.

Original comment by [email protected] on 6 May 2013 at 5:47

  • Changed state: Fixed

ShutdownRepo referenced this issue in ThePorgs/impacket Nov 26, 2022
Make default ntlmrelayx dump SAM and LSA
p0dalirius pushed a commit to p0dalirius/impacket that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2023
…ty-values

Secretsdump sqsa fix empty values
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant