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=517763 --- Comment #2 from Mattias Ellert <mattias.ellert@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-08-27 05:23:45 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > Hi Mattias, Hi! > 1) First the simple rpmlint errors. > > voms.src:387: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package vomsjapi %{_libdir}/gcj/%{name} > (Should be fixed) This is a false warning from rpmlint. The reason for the false warning is that rpmlint does not interpret specfile conditionals. All Java packages that follow the guidelines for packaging ahead-of-time compiled Java triggers this false warning. > voms-devel.x86_64: W: no-dependency-on voms/voms-libs/libvoms > (I'm not sure what this is) This warning is due to that the current rpmlint version does not support %{_isa} tags. This has been fixed in the rpmlint sources, but there is no new rpmlint release yet. This warning will go away when the next rpmlint version is released. > voms-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation > (okay) > voms-server.x86_64: E: subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/voms > (should be easy enough to add or maybe it looks like a <vo> specific lock > is created? Its tricky I don't know of anything else that launches > multiple deamons per configuration) The init.d script is using subsys, however the rpmlint check greps for the string "/var/lock/subsys", and the script in the voms package has "$VOMS_LOCATION_VAR/lock/subsys" where VOMS_LOCATION_VAR has been set to /var. > voms-server.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name voms ('voms-server', > 'voms-serverd') > (okay) > 2) Why is it? > > %package -n vomsjapi > and not just > %package japi Fedora Java Packaging guidelines says: "If a package provides a single JAR file it must have the same name as the package itself." See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Jar_file_naming > 3) After installing voms-server > # service voms start > ls: cannot access /etc/voms: No such file or directory > [root@globus x86_64]# echo $? > 0 > > /etc/voms should be created and owned by the package. Fixed. > I guess (not checked) voms is the directory containing the > <vo>/voms.conf files? If so maybe /etc/voms.d/ might be better? I'd rather not change this, since many scripts has this location hardcoded. > 3.1) Is it worth adding an example configuration and perhaps a README.Fedora > to describe simply how to get up and running? Create database., ... Fixed. > 4) Given there is no need to run voms as root ( except host cert) is > it a good idea to add a voms user and run as that? I realise it gets > to a point where the init script ends up being written from scratch. Fixed. No need to rewrite the script, only add a /etc/sysconfig/voms file defining the user - now included in the package. > 5) For my own education I expect in > BuildRequires: globus-gssapi-gsi-devel%{?_isa} > why/how is the %{?_isa} added? On a multilib installation (e.g. i386/x86_64) the "BuildRequires: globus-gssapi-gsi-devel" is satisfied by both the i386 and x86_64 RPM package. By adding the %{?_isa} you explicitly request the right version (provided the version of RPM used by the distribution is new enough to support it). > 6) Concerning EPEL support this is probably only difficult because > of the bouncycastle requirment which requires a slew of missing > dependencies. Could it be built without the javaapi support? It > is a lot less important I would say. EPEL packages can be built without the Java API. > Steve. New version is here: Spec URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/voms.spec SRPM URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/voms-1.9.11-2.fc11.src.rpm Mattias. -- 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