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=749232 --- Comment #3 from Ricardo Rocha <rocha.porto@xxxxxxxxx> 2011-11-04 11:59:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > A quick first parse. > > Some similar comments to bug #749132. > > 1) Add details about making the tar ball. Fixed. > 2) CFLAGS > It seems that Fedora and RHEL6 do have a %{cmake} macro to do all this > for you. See $(rpm -E '%{cmake}' > Assuming RHEL5 as well then you can case the dist tag to do it by hand. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:DistTag and effectively implement > the same thing by hand. I simply started using the cmake macro and it's looking fine - even for RHEL5. > 3) rpmlint > > nagios-plugins-dpm-disk.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib > nagios-plugins-dpm-head.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib > > okay this seems to be normal for nagios-plugins even it seems wrong > to me, precedent is there so fine. Yes, i had followed the feedback from: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=423821#c6 The other one is E: no-binary, but i couldn't make it noarch to have it going in /usr/lib64 along with the rest. > 4) There are directories such as > /etc/nrpe.d/ > /usr/lib64/nagios/plugins/lcgdm > /usr/lib64/nagios/plugins > /usr/lib64/nagios > ... > > that you create but are not part of your package nor owned > by something you pull in. > > It makes sense as you have done not to require nagios to make > the probes easily available to other monitoring systems so you should > at least own the directories. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership Thanks for the pointer, i had a new look. I'll add the ownership of /etc/nrpe.d. However looking at the other nagios plugins packages, they all seem to require both nagios-common and nagios-plugins, so i was thinking of adding that to nagios-plugins-lcgdm-common. They provide the remaining dirs. The packages are called nagios-plugins-*, so maybe thinking that other monitoring systems might use them is not needed? > > 5) When you require a sub package it should be exactly matched > > Requires: nagios-plugins-lcgdm-common%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} Fixed. > 6) You duplicate > %doc LICENSE README RELEASE-NOTES > but they are only needed in just one package with the exception > of the LICENSE which should be in all packages that can be installed in > isolation as defined by the inter requires of your sub packages. Just to make sure... should i just put the %doc LICENSE in the 3 packages depending on nagios-plugins-lcgdm-common? If i don't put a %doc at all, rpmlint complains of no-documentation for package. After the doubts above, i'll provide a new spec/srcrpm. Thanks. -- 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