Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: am-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225245 bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora Version|devel |rawhide limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag| |fedora-review? ------- Additional Comments From limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-02-04 15:35 EST ------- rpmlint on SRPM: am-utils.src:39: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes amd The specfile contains an unversioned Obsoletes: token, which will match all older, equal and newer versions of the obsoleted thing. This may cause update problems, restrict future package/provides naming, and may match something it was originally not inteded to match -- make the Obsoletes versioned if possible. am-utils.src:86: E: use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR You use $RPM_SOURCE_DIR or %{_sourcedir} in your spec file. If you have to use a directory for building, use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT instead. am-utils.src:237: W: macro-in-%changelog pre Macros are expanded in %changelog too, which can in unfortunate cases lead to the package not building at all, or other subtle unexpected conditions that affect the build. Even when that doesn't happen, the expansion results in possibly "rewriting history" on subsequent package revisions and generally odd entries eg. in source rpms, which is rarely wanted. Avoid use of macros in %changelog altogether, or use two '%'s to escape them, like '%%foo'. am-utils.src:408: W: macro-in-%changelog pre Macros are expanded in %changelog too, which can in unfortunate cases lead to the package not building at all, or other subtle unexpected conditions that affect the build. Even when that doesn't happen, the expansion results in possibly "rewriting history" on subsequent package revisions and generally odd entries eg. in source rpms, which is rarely wanted. Avoid use of macros in %changelog altogether, or use two '%'s to escape them, like '%%foo'. am-utils.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 33, tab: line 77) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. am-utils.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot Automount utilities including an updated version of Amd. Summary ends with a dot. am-utils.src: W: strange-permission am-utils.init 0755 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. Should all be fixed, except the last one. rpmlint on RPMS: am-utils.i386: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/amd Executables must not be marked as config files because that may prevent upgrades from working correctly. If you need to be able to customize an executable, make it for example read a config file in /etc/sysconfig. Should this be marked config? am-utils.i386: W: hidden-file-or-dir /.automount The file or directory is hidden. You should see if this is normal, and delete it from the package if not. am-utils.i386: W: hidden-file-or-dir /.automount The file or directory is hidden. You should see if this is normal, and delete it from the package if not. am-utils.i386: E: non-readable /etc/amd.conf 0600 The file can't be read by everybody. If this is expected (for security reasons), contact your rpmlint distributor to get it added to the list of exceptions for your distro (or add it to your local configuration if you installed rpmlint from the source tarball). am-utils.i386: E: non-readable /etc/amd.net 0640 The file can't be read by everybody. If this is expected (for security reasons), contact your rpmlint distributor to get it added to the list of exceptions for your distro (or add it to your local configuration if you installed rpmlint from the source tarball). These are OK. am-utils.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libamu.so A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. Why is there not a -devel package? I see that the spec removes other .so files, why not put them in -devel or delete this one? am-utils.i386: W: summary-ended-with-dot Automount utilities including an updated version of Amd. Summary ends with a dot. am-utils.i386: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 6.1.5-7 5:6.1.5-7.fc8 The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. am-utils.i386: W: obsolete-not-provided amd If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package must also be provided in order to provide clean upgrade paths and not cause unnecessary dependency breakage. If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one, leave out the provides. Fix. am-utils.i386: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/amd A configuration file is stored in your package without the noreplace flag. A way to resolve this is to put the following in your SPEC file: %config(noreplace) /etc/your_config_file_here See above. am-utils.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name amd The init script name should be the same as the package name in lower case, or one with 'd' appended if it invokes a process by that name. Would fixing this break anything? Other than that, looks good, no other blockers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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