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: ganglia - Ganglia Distributed Monitoring System

------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2006-06-13 11:27 EST -------
Crap, I had a bunch of info typed up and then mozilla died for no reason.  I'll
try again....

This builds fine in mock on x86_64, development.

rpmlint has this to say:

W: ganglia-devel no-dependency-on ganglia

Generally the -devel package depends on the main package, but in this case there
is no main package.  OK.

W: ganglia-devel no-documentation

This is not abnormal.  OK.

W: ganglia-gmetad no-documentation

There is a manpage for gmetad; any reason not to package it?

E: ganglia-gmetad non-standard-uid /var/lib/ganglia/rrds ganglia
E: ganglia-gmetad non-standard-gid /var/lib/ganglia/rrds ganglia


W: ganglia-gmetad dangerous-command-in-%postun userdel

Generally the user is not deleted when the package is removed; rpm may leave the
config files around and they would become unowned if you do this.

W: ganglia-gmetad incoherent-init-script-name gmetad
W: ganglia-gmond incoherent-init-script-name gmond

Generally it's best to try and keep the init files named after the package, but
these are reasonably named and I don't think this is a blocker.

W: ganglia-web no-documentation

There does seem to be some documentation but it's in /usr/share/ganglia.  Any
reason why AUTHORS, COPYING and Changelog aren't %doc?

Other oddities I noticed:

Why package these?

What is /usr/lib64/ for?  It's odd to see a versioned
shared library in a -devel package, and nothing seems to link against it.  If
anything did, it would end up pulling in this -devel package, which would be
odd.  Still, it doesn't make much sense to split two files out of a five-file
-devel package.

Why not package the gmetric, gmond and gstat manpages in ganglia-gmond?

Configure bugmail:
------- 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

Reply via email to