Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=506355 Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flag| |fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-10 13:42:35 EDT --- Some notes: * src.rpm itself - All files in src.rpm should have 0644 permission. * License - As far as I checked the whole source code, the license tag should be "GPLv2+". * %description - You don't have to repeat the same explanation on -devel subpackage which already appears in the %description of main package. * Fedora specific compilation flags https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags - Fedora specific compilation flags are not correctly honored: -------------------------------------------------------- 217 make[2]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/munge-0.5.8/src/libcommon' 218 if /bin/sh ../../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I../../config -I../../src/libmunge -D_GNU_SOURCE -MT fd.lo -MD -MP -MF ".deps/fd.Tpo" -c -o fd.lo fd.c; \ -------------------------------------------------------- ( By the way, please check what %configure actually does by $ rpm --eval %configure ) * Timestamps https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps - When using "install" or "cp" commands, add "-p" option to keep timestamps on installed files. * Scriptlets - Calling /sbin/ldconfig on -devel %post(un) scriptlets is not needed. - Use %_var or %_localstatedir instead of directly using "/var" - This is not always needed, however would you check if "condrestart" is not needed at %postun? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript#InitscriptScriptlets * %files - "INSTALL" file is usually for people who want to build and install software by themselves and not needed for rpm users. - From the contents of create-munge-key, it seems that %files should have %ghost %_sysconfdir/%name/%name.key entry. - Usually man pages of entry 3 is for the explanation of APIs of functions in libraries or so and should be in -devel subpackage. - %defattr must be set on -devel subpackage (please use rpmlint) - Currently %{_var}/lib/munge has 0711 permission, which is not usual, however explicit %attr is not set for this directory. If this permission is correct, set %attr on this directory explicitly. Otherwise fix the permission on this directory at %install. The same issue also applies to %{_sysconfdir}/munge, %{_var}/log/munge * -devel subpackage - munge.h does not work as: -------------------------------------------------------------------- +++++ TEMP.c ++++++++ #include <munge.h> int foo (munge_enum_t type){ return munge_enum_is_valid(type, 0); } +++++++++++++++++++++++ $ env LANG=C gcc -c TEMP.c In file included from TEMP.c:1: /usr/include/munge.h:39:4: error: #error By linking against libmunge, the derivative /usr/include/munge.h:40:4: error: #error work becomes licensed under the terms of the /usr/include/munge.h:41:4: error: #error GNU General Public License. Acknowledge by /usr/include/munge.h:42:4: error: #error defining the GPL_LICENSED preprocessor macro. -------------------------------------------------------------------- * service -------------------------------------------------------------------- [root@localhost ~]# env LANG=C service munge status [root@localhost ~]# (returns nothing) -------------------------------------------------------------------- - Usually this should be something like: -------------------------------------------------------------------- [root@localhost ~]# service xttpd status xttpd is stopped -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review