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: sshfp - Generate SSHFP DNS records from knownhosts files or ssh-keyscan https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207725 tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis| | ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2006-09-30 13:22 EST ------- Sorry for taking so long to respond. The only thing I have to say now is that you need to modify %description to match the current non-ssh_config-modifying behavior of the package. But you can do that when you check it in. Now I just need to figure out how to get my DNS configured to hand out these keys. * source files match upstream: 7bceb2240c34cb5929d931cd248e9e35 sshfp-1.1.0.tar.gz * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper (none) * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: sshfp = 1.1.0-1.fc6 = /usr/bin/python openssh-clients >= 4 python-dns * %check is not present; no test suite upstream. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. APPROVED -- 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