https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1059281 --- Comment #2 from Sam Kottler <skottler@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Michael Scherer from comment #1) > So : > - the list on Requires on 1 single line is a bit too long for my taste, 1 > requires per line would likely be better in diff, etc. And it would also be > better to have precise requires ( ie, on the specific version ) > > - the requires on the -log subpackage : > Requires: /bin/egrep > > any reason to not use %{_bindir}/ like the rest ? Done. > > - description could be enhanced to say this provides more than plugin for > nagios Fixed. > > - %{_libdir}/monitoring/ is unowned Fixed. > > - the various setuid plugin are not a good ideas IMHO, not sure if that > requires FESCO approval or something. I would feel better if this was using > capacity. I can start working on that upstream. There are lots of other packages that use setuid, though; does this block the review? > > - I see a few tests for the plugins and the lib, yet no %check, is this > normal ? The tests require access to different services, like an http server or an ntp peer; they'll never pass inside a buildroot. > > - there is a few tarballs of perl source code, but this is not used for now, > just mentioning for documenting it > > - why do all plugin provides monitoring-plugins ? ( and not a requires ? ) Fixed. I've uploaded a new srpm here: http://skottler.fedorapeople.org/monitoring-plugins-1.5-4.fc21.src.rpm. The spec is also updated, but in the same location. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review