Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_nss https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196146 ------- Additional Comments From jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx 2006-07-14 14:01 EST ------- Additional review, based on new spec and details in comment #13: 1) The switch to %configure actually eliminates the need to pass --libdir, --sbindir and --sysconfdir (which based on ./configure --help, should actually be /etc, not /etc/httpd/conf.d). The %configure macro sets those automatically. So those three lines after %configure should be removed. 2) Going back to item 14 in comment #12 and #13... The 'create dummy files then replace in %post' trick I threw together actually does leave the files around when the RPM is removed, %config(noreplace) makes that happen. They're renamed w/an appended .rpmsave if the package is removed. # rpm -e mod_nss warning: /etc/httpd/alias/secmod.db saved as /etc/httpd/alias/secmod.db.rpmsave warning: /etc/httpd/alias/key3.db saved as /etc/httpd/alias/key3.db.rpmsave warning: /etc/httpd/alias/cert8.db saved as /etc/httpd/alias/cert8.db.rpmsave So this route leaves us not deleting the files, addressing your (very valid) concern and also makes them owned by the package. Win-win, no? :) 3) For consistency, you shouldn't have spaces between lines within a single %files section, I'd cut the extra lines after %defattr and %doc. 4) I poked around at the Makefile a bit to see if using make install was feasible. The main issue appears to be that 'make install' uses apxs to put the module in place, but apxs tries to be too smart for its own good, and install and activate the module in the buildhost's httpd, rather than in the buildroot. Would require a bit of Makefile hacking to get a viable 'make install', so putting the bits in place by hand is understandable and acceptable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review