[Bug 664390] Review Request: sams - SQUID Account Management system

[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=664390

Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |steve.traylen@xxxxxxx

--- Comment #3 from Steve Traylen <steve.traylen@xxxxxxx> 2011-03-03 14:40:50 EST ---
Extra items to the informal review.

1) Requiring paths is genrally  not good since it requires a whole load of
extra
    data to be downloaded during a yum update. 

Requires:       /usr/bin/wbinfo

   If the package name changes between distributions then use an OS
conditional.

2) Inconsistant use of macros.

  %{_bindir} is used in some places where as %{_prefix}/bin is used elsewhere.
I think
  %{_bindir} is better but I am not not sure why.

3)  When installing files by hand e.g.
install -m 755 redhat/init.d %{buildroot}%{_initrddir}/samsd
  Add a "-p" option to preserve the time.

4) You use chrpath, does the other sed option on libtool not work?
    It normally does.

5) You called the package sam rather than sam2 as the tar ball is called and
the application
     seems to be called. Your choice though.

6) For the sake of the informal reviewer add a comment to the patch
     Patch0:  sams2.shebang.patch

7) You have 
     Requires: pcre
     Requires: unixODBC

    but these are not needed since they are added with 
    libpcre.so.0()(64bit)
    and
    libodbc.so.2()(64bit)

    remove the requires that are superflous.

8) The 

     /usr/lib64/libfsusage.so.1
/usr/lib64/libfsusage.so.1.0.0
/usr/lib64/libloadavg.so.1
/usr/lib64/libloadavg.so.1.0.0

 files in the -devel package are run time files, they can't be built against 
 can they? So belong in the main package ? But it's odd nothing
  in the main package actually uses them? 

  When if ever are these libs used? I'd have to look some more.

9) You will need to do a trick with the Release since this is an rc1 release so
see 
    
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages

     for how to handle this.

-- 
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


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