On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 12:26 AM, Dhiru Kholia <dhiru.kholia@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 11:16 PM, Steve Grubb <sgrubb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Saturday, April 13, 2013 12:19:42 PM Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>> Is there a tracker bug? Proven packagers can help >> >> I have a tracker bug for issues identified on the core set of packages that >> would be part of a common criteria certification: >> >> I have not run the script that checks a distribution on F19 yet, so maybe >> there are more? >> > > I have analyzed all F9 packages and have already published a list of > packages violating packaging guidelines. > > See http://dl.dropbox.com/u/1522424/probable-violations-F19.csv > > (I made some last minute changes which might be buggy. Feedback and > corrections are welcome!) > > Also note that all this analysis stuff has been *automated*. > Additionally, my code works for all RHEL and Fedora versions (and even > deb based distributions). > > The analysis code doesn't install any packages on the system, is host > OS agnostic and is quite fast (scales linearly). > > See https://github.com/kholia/checksec (currently only the interactive > tools are described in the README, bulk analysis tools are hopefully > intuitive enough). > My analysis code combines the original checksec (bash script), rpm-chksec (Steve's script) and Grant's Go port into one Python code base. I am planning to extend it with more checks and ideas. Your tips are welcome! -- Dhiru -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
