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=566757 James Findley <sixy@xxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sixy@xxxxxxx --- Comment #5 from James Findley <sixy@xxxxxxx> 2010-03-03 10:36:05 EST --- Firstly, the rpmlint stuff: > E: description-line-too-long There are actually a lot of lines that are too long. Try to keep lines to >= 80 chars. > E: explicit-lib-dependency libgcrypt > E: explicit-lib-dependency libxml2 > E: explicit-lib-dependency NetworkManager-glib You generally don't want to explicitly require a lib rpm, instead require the soname: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Explicit_Requires Also, in accordance with the explicit requires guidelines, where you require a specific version of something (e.g. sqlite-devel >= 3.3.1 ) there should be a comment explaining why. > E: library-without-ldconfig-postin /usr/lib64/libfast.so.0.0.0 > E: library-without-ldconfig-postun /usr/lib64/libfast.so.0.0.0 ldconfig isn't called in %post for this > E: non-readable /etc/ipsec.conf 0600 > E: non-readable /etc/strongswan.conf 0600 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/aacerts 0700 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/acerts 0700 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/cacerts 0700 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/certs 0700 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/crls 0700 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/ocspcerts 0700 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/private 0700 > E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/ipsec.d/reqs 0700 Do these all need to be only readable by root, or can you use 644 for the .confs? > E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/strongswan-4.3.6/AUTHORS If it's blank, probably don't need to ship it. > W: incoherent-init-script-name ipsec ('strongswan', 'strongswand') initscript should be the same as the packagename. > W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 4.3.6 ['4.3.6-0.fc12', '4.3.6-0'] version string in changelog should match the release. So 4.3.6-0 instead of 4.3.6. > W: invalid-license GPL Should be GPLv2+ > W: macro-in-%changelog %build Shouldn't use a macro in the changelog. > W: name-repeated-in-summary C StrongSwan No need to put the name in the description > W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/strongswan-4.3.6/src/medsrv/controller/peer_controller.c > W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/strongswan-4.3.6/src/medsrv/controller/peer_controller.h > W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/strongswan-4.3.6/src/medsrv/controller/user_controller.c > W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/strongswan-4.3.6/src/medsrv/controller/user_controller.h > W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/strongswan-4.3.6/src/medsrv/filter/auth_filter.c > W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/strongswan-4.3.6/src/medsrv/filter/auth_filter.h > W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/strongswan-4.3.6/src/openac/openac.c There isn't really a need for these to be executable. You could chmod these to get rid of the +x bit. > W: strange-permission ipsec.init 0755 You don't need to have the source executable, instead do: install -D -m 0755 %{SOURCE1} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_initrddir}/%{name} > W: summary-not-capitalized C strongSwan Internet Key Exchange (v1) daemon > W: summary-not-capitalized C strongSwan Internet Key Exchange (v2) daemon > W: summary-not-capitalized C strongSwan plugin for LDAP > W: summary-not-capitalized C strongSwan plugin for MySQL > W: summary-not-capitalized C strongSwan plugin for sqlite > W: summary-not-capitalized C strongSwan utility and crypto library These are just formatting issues in the summaries. Also, why are you appending || : to your chkconfig lines? It looks like an attempt to suppress non-zero exit codes, but if they fail, there is something wrong, so an error is appropriate. make %{?_smp_mflags} install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT Is there a need to include %{?_smp_mflags} there? Other than that, looks good. -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review