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=472676 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla <limb@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2008-11-25 14:33:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > > rpmlint on SRPM: > > partimage.src: W: strange-permission create_certificates.sh 0775 > > A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. > > Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. > > I put the script that creates the certificates in the same directory > the certificates are going to be. It has been moved to /usr/share/partimaged. > > > > > > partimage.src: W: strange-permission partimaged-passwd 0755 > > A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. > > Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. > > > > The idea behind this script is that users do not need to have a local account > on the server in case a login is needed. It has been moved to > /usr/share/partimaged. Good. > This script creates a db file (user, passwd), which can be used by pam for > authentication purposes. The problem is that pam is ignoring this file > and using only the /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers, which lists only > local users (no passwords). > > Therefore, my pam rules are not working the way I wanted, > but I do not know how to fix them ... > For now, only local users can authenticate. > > Any suggestion? Do you know how pam works? Not sure. Is this something you're adding on, or functionality of the original code? > > > > Should these not be 700, or at least 744? > > > > rpmlint on RPMS: > > > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /home/images partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /home/images partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/log/partimaged partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /var/log/partimaged partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid > > /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid > > /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers > > partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers > > partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-uid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf > > partimag > > partimage-server.i386: W: non-standard-gid /etc/partimaged/partimage-certs.cnf > > partimag > > > > OK. > > > > partimage-server.i386: E: dir-or-file-in-home /home/images > > > > What's going on here? This cannot be in /home, maybe > > /usr/share/partimage-server or /var/lib/partimage-server. > > I used a > > %bcond_without home > > because it is where I save my images (all my free space is always in /home). > > This has been changed to > > %bcond_with home > > which makes the spec to put the images in /var/partimaged. Good. > > > > > partimage-server.i386: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/partimaged > > partimage-server.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name partimaged > > > > Probably fine, but could be patched to be partimage-server, or possibly the > > sub-package renamed partimaged. > > > > The process name is partimaged. I think is counter-intuitive to use > partimage-server. The sub-package could be renamed, but everybody else uses > partimage-server. Only Fedora would be different ... Then we can leave it -server. > > partimage-server.i386: E: executable-marked-as-config-file > > /etc/partimaged/create_certificates.sh > > > > Should be in /usr/share/partimaged/ > > Already moved. > > > > > partimage-server.i386: E: non-readable /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers 0600 > > > > Probably fine. > > > > > License is GPLv2+. > > Fixed. > > > Fix Source0 URL. . . > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL > > Changed. > > > Send gcc-4.3 patch upstream if not already done, document that you did and how > > in the spec. > > It is in the changelog section. > The patch is very simple, and just changed some include files for C++: > > -#include <iostream.h> > +#include <iostream> Should be commented next to patch in spec. Changelog is good to have as well. > > > The DOCS are duplicated in the main and server packages. Usually redundant, > > but since they don't require each other, it's OK here. > > > Need to BuildRequires zlib-devel. > > Done. > > > Links updated. A README.fedora will be added. Probably best to update the release and repost new links, as an additional indicator of exactly when the above has been completed. -- 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