[Bug 506355] Review Request: munge - Uid 'N' Gid Emporium

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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


Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|needinfo?(steve.traylen@cer |
                   |n.ch)                       |




--- Comment #6 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx>  2009-07-22 19:08:04 EDT ---
First Mamaro and Chris thanks for you comments.

The majority are addressed:

- Correct License to GPLv2+
- Move man5 pages to the devel package.
- Remove +x bit from create-munge-key source.
- Preserve timestamps when installing files.
- ldconfig not needed on -devel package.
- Do a condrestart when upgrading.
- Remove redundant files from docs.
- chmod /var/lib/munge /var/log/munge and /etc/munge to 700.
- Apply patch to not error when GPL_LICENSED is not set.
- Patch service script to print error on if munge.key not present
  on start only and with a better error.
- Remove dont-exit-form-lib.patch. munge is expecting libmunge to
  do this.
- Remove libgcrypt-devel from BuildRequires, uses openssl by
  default anyway.
- Mark the munge.key as a ghost file.

Remaining items

1) I need to check what is going on the compilation flags. I'll get
   to this shortly.

2) Reading the Summary: specification again it is meant to be informative 
   so neither 
   Uid 'N' Gid Emporium
   nor 
   MUNGE is a recursive acronym

  is very good.

  For now I've set it to 
  "Enables uid & gid authentication across a host cluster"
  but that is not particularly descriptive either? Will have a think.

Spec and .srm.rpm:
http://cern.ch/steve.traylen/munge-rpms/munge-0.5.8-2.fc11.src.rpm
http://cern.ch/steve.traylen/munge-rpms/munge.spec

$ rpmlint SPECS/munge.spec SRPMS/munge-0.5.8-2.fc11.src.rpm \
        RPMS/x86_64/munge-0.5.8-2.fc11.x86_64.rpm \
        RPMS/x86_64/munge-devel-0.5.8-2.fc11.x86_64.rpm \
        RPMS/x86_64/munge-debuginfo-0.5.8-2.fc11.x86_64.rpm  \
munge.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libmunge.so.2.0.0
exit@xxxxxxxxxxx
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/munge munge
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/munge munge
munge.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/munge 0700
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /etc/munge/munge.key munge
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /etc/munge/munge.key munge
munge.x86_64: E: non-readable /etc/munge/munge.key 0400
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /etc/munge munge
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /etc/munge munge
munge.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/munge 0700
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/munge munge
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/munge munge
munge.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/munge 0700
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/run/munge munge
munge.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/run/munge munge
munge.x86_64: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/munge $RH_SUBSYS_BASE
munge-debuginfo.x86_64: E: debuginfo-without-sources
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 12 warnings.

They can all be explained I feel as mostly private directories
and files for the munged owned process. The last one of course should be 
fixed up with the compilation corrections.

Builds for fc11, fc12, el4 and el5:
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1493445
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1493450
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1493455
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1493460

Steve.

-- 
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

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]