Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lbrickbuster2 - Brickbuster arcade game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435514 ------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx 2008-03-02 17:06 EST ------- (In reply to comment #1) > + for good, - for bad, ? for questionable > > MUST Items: > ? rpmlint: > lbrickbuster2.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/lbrickbuster2 > 02551 > lbrickbuster2.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/lbrickbuster2 > 02551 This is the same permission scheme the gnome-games package uses for sgid games games, and these are the permissions as used for this package by freshrpms for a long time, but I'm happy to change them to 02755 if people like that better (which will still make rpmlint complain btw) > - consistent use of macros (you mix $VARIABLES and %{variables}) Erm, no I don't atleast not in a way thats not allowed by the guidelines. The only $ variable I use is $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, and I don't use %{buildroot} anywhere, so no mixing, the guidelines talk about using 2 different ways to access the _same_ variable. As for using $RPM_BUILD_ROOT versus %{buildroot}, the guidelines leave this up to the packager, and AFAIK most people prefer $RPM_BUILD_ROOT, that is for example which is used in the specfile templates which are part of rpmdevtools. > Clean up the macros I would love to, if you can tell me whats wrong exactly. > and assure me that the permissions are OK The permissions are OK. -- 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, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review