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: pnp - Nagios performance data analysis tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442342 ------- Additional Comments From xavier@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2008-05-24 06:00 EST ------- > - The %name "pnp4nagios" is the official name of the Sourceforge project and may > be clearer (obviously has nothing to do with plug-and-play). Additionally, it > matches OpenSUSE's package name, which is probably helpful where that abides by > Fedora's naming conventions. Not sure why I used pnp rather than pnp4nagios. Good point about Suse, I'll look at what other distros do. > - /usr/libexec/pnp is a very logical place for the process-perfdata.pl script in > FHS terms, but in keeping with existing convention and filesystem layout it may > make more sense to drop it in %{_libdir}/nagios/plugins. This is not a nagios plugin. It doesn't provide any test and as you noted, it follows better FHS to use /usr/libexec/pnp. > - The package is creating a separate %{_sysconfdir}/%{name} directory for > configs to keep it separate from %{_sysconfdir}/nagios, but is dropping web > files inside %{_datadir}/nagios/html, which seems inconsistent/incorrect to me; > it might be a better idea to give it a separate data directory and distribute an > httpd conf.d file. > I initially packaged the web files in a separate directory, but it forces to authenticate 2 times, once for nagios and once for pnp. Beside that the pnp site recommend to install in a nagios' subdir. However, a separate sysconfdir is cleaner. -- 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