[Bug 447847] Review Request: unbound - Validating, recursive, and caching DNS(SEC) resolver

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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=447847





--- Comment #10 from Adam Tkac <atkac@xxxxxxxxxx>  2008-10-17 07:22:31 EDT ---
source files match upstream: YES
package meets naming and versioning guidelines: YES
specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently:
YES
dist tag is present: YES
build root is correct: YES
license field matches the actual license: YES
license is open source-compatible: YES (BSD)
License text included in package: YES
latest version is being packaged: YES
BuildRequires are proper: YES

compiler flags are appropriate: NO
- look on http://people.redhat.com/atkac/unbound-build.patch. I think that
patch should be included in main source. It shows build parameters

%clean is present: YES
package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64): YES
debuginfo package looks complete: YES
rpmlint is silent: OK (messages written below are fine)
unbound.x86_64: W: non-standard-uid /var/run/unbound unbound
unbound.x86_64: W: non-standard-gid /var/run/unbound unbound

final provides and requires look sane: OK
%check is present and all tests pass: OK (check is not present)
no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths: NO
- it seems that it is possible write "clients" for unbound. Due this reason I
think the best will be create unbound-libs subpackage which will contain 
libunbound.so.0 and libunbound.so.0.14.0 libraries

owns the directories it creates: YES
doesn't own any directories it shouldn't: YES
no duplicates in %files: YES
file permissions are appropriate: VERIFY
- isn't better to make configuration files and chroot non-readable by "others"?

scriptlets: NO
- I think you should add unbound group as well. Look on 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups

Please correct/explain problematic points written above.

-- 
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.

_______________________________________________
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review

[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]