[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-25 15:23 EST --- cvs done. Note for refrence that the FC-7 branch should be F-7, there is no FC-8 branch (thats devel) and you don't need to list devel (it's implied). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-25 16:55 EST --- Commited to CVS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 10:04 EST ---
I have uploaded updated packages now:
http://0pointer.de/public/rpms/nss-mdns/
(In reply to comment #37)
Hi,
It doesn't build on x86_64:
File not found by glob: /var/tmp/nss-mdns-0.10-1-buildroot/lib64/*
I believe I fixed this now, but actually cannot test this because I have no
64bit system around. Please try the updated package.
(In reply to comment #38)
The files are being installed into /lib on x86_64 instead of /lib64. The
simple
fix is to simply pass --libdir=/%{_lib} instead of --libdir=/lib.
Done. (See above)
I note you're not using the %{?dist} tag. There's certainly no requirement
that
you do so, but I always ping folks to make sure they understand the issues
that
crop up when you don't use it.
Nope. I do not understand the issues. I just left in there what Bastien
originally put in there. (Blame the frenchies!) Please enlighten me about the
implications!
I added the dist tag stuff now, just in case.
You need fine-grained dependencies; the package doesn't just require perl, it
needs it there to run its post script. So you need:
Requires(post): perl
Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig
I fixed that now and added fine-grained deps for post, preun, postun. For perl,
ldconfig and /bin/sh. (does depending on /bin/sh make any real sense or is it
superfluous because it is such a basic tool anyway?)
You can also drop the Requires: perl bit, unless the package actually needs
perl
in order to run normally.
Unless /etc/nsswitch.conf is patched nss-mdns is entirely useless. You cannot
run it manually, it just sits there and takes up some disk space. Thus I would
argue that depending on perl during installation does make a lot of sense.
I also added a depends on avahi, given that Avahi is required to be installed to
make nss-mdns any useful.
X license field says GPL but the LICENSE file says LGPL
Fixed.
X final provides and requires missing some dependencies; see above.
libnss_mdns.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns4.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns4.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns4_minimal.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns4_minimal.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns6.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns6.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns6_minimal.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns6_minimal.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2(NSSMDNS_0)(64bit)
nss-mdns = 0.10-1
=
/bin/sh
/sbin/ldconfig
perl
I don't understand this entirely, but I think I fixed this with the fine-grained
dependencies, haven't I?
X shared libraries are present; ldconfig is called as necessary but
dependency
on ldconfig in %post is not present.
Fixed.
X scriptlets present are OK, but the dependencies are off.
I don't really understand this either, but this is fixed as well I think, by the
fine-grained deps stuff.
BTW, how does one generate that review report you posted? That's not rpmlint
output, is it?
Please review again!
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- 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
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-22 15:14 EST --- (In reply to comment #39) [dist tag] Nope. I do not understand the issues. I just left in there what Bastien originally put in there. (Blame the frenchies!) Please enlighten me about the implications! Sure. First, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/DistTag for an overview. The basic problem is that without the dist tag you have to keep separate specs for each supported release, since you cannot have the same version-release string on two different branches. Usually new packagers not using the dist tag import and build for rawhide, then try to import and build for a release branch and get a nice useless error about trying to apply the same tag to multiple branches when they go to build. I fixed that now and added fine-grained deps for post, preun, postun. For perl, ldconfig and /bin/sh. (does depending on /bin/sh make any real sense or is it superfluous because it is such a basic tool anyway?) Actually rpmbuild will automatically give you the proper dependency for the shell needed to run a scriptlet. So unless you use -p you get an automatic depdency on /bin/sh, and if you have %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig then you get the necessary Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig automatically. So basically the two dependencies on /bin/sh you have, along with the Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig, are not really needed but aren't really harmful either. Unless /etc/nsswitch.conf is patched nss-mdns is entirely useless. You cannot run it manually, it just sits there and takes up some disk space. Yes, I know, but you need it at package install/removal time to run the scriptlets, not at any other time. The difference is essentially academic in any case. The way you have things listed currently is OK. I also added a depends on avahi, given that Avahi is required to be installed to make nss-mdns any useful. OK. I don't understand this entirely, but I think I fixed this with the fine-grained dependencies, haven't I? I always list out the full set of dependencies a package has, noting any bad ones and mentioning any deficiencies I notice. BTW, how does one generate that review report you posted? That's not rpmlint output, is it? Only three lines of that are rpmlint output; the rest is my usual review template which I paste in and edit accordingly for each package I review. At this point I think things are OK; you have some unnecessary dependencies as mentioned above, but they're merely redundant and don't hurt anything. You can remove them when you check in if you like. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-21 21:32 EST --- Hi, It doesn't build on x86_64: File not found by glob: /var/tmp/nss-mdns-0.10-1-buildroot/lib64/* I think it will be tricky to build this on multiarch platforms, since it really needs to install libraries for ALL variants of the arch. Otherwise, the nsswitch.conf will have valid settings for only some arches, and cause others to fail. An old example I had with this is 32-bit Firefox DNS resolution. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-19 15:35 EST ---
Ok, going down the checklist, since nobody else seems to be willing to.
Here are the MUST items:
rpmlint output:
E: nss-mdns non-executable-script /usr/libexec/nss-mdns-set.pl 0644
W: nss-mdns summary-not-capitalized glibc plugin for .local name resolution
W: nss-mdns percent-in-%post
W: nss-mdns dangerous-command-in-%post mv
W: nss-mdns percent-in-%preun
W: nss-mdns dangerous-command-in-%preun mv
W: nss-mdns one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig
Proposed fixes:
- make /usr/libexec/nss-mdns-set.pl executable
- replace %{_libexec} references by %{_libexecdir}
- maybe move the backup generation into the perl script itself ?
- do %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
package name: ok
spec file name: ok
packaging guidelines: seems to be followed in general, things to consider:
- does make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT work ?
- why is it necessary to move stuff from %{_libdir} to %{_lib} post install,
does --libdir=/lib not work ?
- the %preun script has an $1 = 0 guard, should the %post script have
a corresponding $1 = 1 guard ?
open source license: ok
license field matches license: not ok, spec says GPL, License file says LGPL
license file included: no, it is missing, add it to %doc
spec file language: ok
spec file readability: ok
sources match upstream: ok
package builds: yes
excludearch: n/a
build requires: ok
locales: n/a
ldconfig: ok
relocatable: n/a
directory ownership: ok
no duplicate files: ok
permissions: see above for the perl script, else ok
%clean: ok
macro use: don't put slashes in front of path macros in the file list,
and also not in constructs like $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}, else ok
permissible content: ok
large docs: n/a
docs: ok
header files: n/a
static libs: n/a
pc files: n/a
unversioned shared libs: n/a
-devel: n/a
libtool archives: ok
desktop files: n/a
directory ownership again: ok
%install clean build root: ok
filenames utf8: ok
Can you create a new package with those issues fixes, maybe updating to the
latest version at the same time ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- 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
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-19 15:39 EST --- Well, obviously I was willing to work on this package (see comment 24). I'm happy to review this package, or let mclasen do it, but no progress is going to be made unless someone responds to the review comments and puts out an updated package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG OtherBugsDependingO||201449 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-14 14:35 EST --- Well, folks, three weeks without any response. I'm going to go ahead and close this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-14 14:43 EST --- Excuse me, but that's not your bug to fix. I'll go about fixing the packaging issues. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-14 14:55 EST --- We need this for OLPC. It's very important that it gets in. (We're not using nscd and we are based heavily on avahi so there's a clear use case here.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-14 15:02 EST --- - bastien -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|201449 | nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-06-14 15:08 EST --- Umm, we do have a policy for closing out stalled review tickets. I am tasked with policing the list of review tickets. It was most certainly within my mandate to close out this ticket. Now, I'm more than happy to see someone actually move this review forward. If closing the ticket was sufficient to get that to happen, then great. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-24 08:13 EST --- To say the least, Ulrich Drepper is not exactly a fan of seeing this integrated into the default Fedora install. In a recent chat on IRC that I had with him he raised a few issues he has with nss-mdns which I cannot really fix. (As a side note: I am upstream of nss-mdns) Firstly, he believes that mDNS might be a waste of power and traffic and wants to see a big field test in Westford. I believe this is a big waste of time and resources, and is nothing I can organize from Hamburg/Germany. Also it is somewhat redundant, because Apple reports some scalability numbers for mDNS which have been generated by such a field test. (please also note that nss-mdns by itself doesn't impose any traffic on the net. Avahi does that and unless you actually look some kind of .local domain lookup nss-mdns will not add to that in any way) Secondly, Fedora uses nscd by default. Running nscd and nss-mdns together doesn't make too much sense if you use the reload option in nscd.conf. However that option is used by default and Ulrich appears not to be interested in finding a way to disable this option for mDNS lookups. Then, he thinks that mDNS is braindead because the cacheing protocol works differently from classic DNS. Leaves me speachless ... He apparently also thinks that Avahi is not a good thing either, but is OK with it in the default install as long as he may shut it down easily. The argument that nss-mdns is disabled at the same time as avahi is shut down he doesn't really accept, citing that the tiny bit of CPU time that is wasted when the nss-mdns module checks whether avahi is around is too much. (which btw is rather contradictorily, since nscd optimizes that away anyway) This is all very unfortunate. I am not sure what we can do about this. But as a total newcomer to Red Hat and Fedora I don't feel I am in a position to to fight this through -- at least for now. Maybe when I have a better insight into how Fedora and everything works I will give it another try. What we can do of course is getting nss-mdns into Fedora, but only as an optional package. To get this working cleanly the package would have to patch nsswitch.conf and nscd.conf on installing -- which is rather ugly. It's better than nothing, but not exactly the fullfillment of the promise of zero configuration. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution
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: nss-mdns - glibc plugin for .local name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-24 13:19 EST --- All I can say is that if Ulrich wants to block this package from Fedora completely, he needs to comment on this bug and state his reasons for the record. Otherwise, can someone get to the issues in comment #24 and we can move forward with getting this in? The issue of what gets included by default is something to be discussed elsewhere. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-23 22:01 EST --- Well, it's been almost two weeks; what's up? I see this blocks OLPCTracker, but I don't know if that makes it extra-important or not. I'm happy to see this review through if someone wants to drive the submission; othewise I guess this ticket should be closed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-10 18:44 EST --- Lennart, do you want to take this over? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-09 19:18 EST --- I'd like to look into this because I think it may be useful for a network configuration I'm investigating, but I'm concerned about the above reports and I also note that there's a 0.9 version out there currently. The package does build, but the install is a bit confused: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.80770: line 3: fg: no job control error: %post(nss-mdns-0.8-2.x86_64) scriptlet failed, exit status 1 A few other comments: rpmlint wants the summary capitalized, but I wouldn't capitalize it in this situation either. You need Requires(pre): /sbin/ldconfig You could just use %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig or add Requires(postun): /sbin/ldconfig You really shouldn't use %makeinstall unless make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install doesn't work. I can't say that I'm confortable with automatically adding the library to nsswitch.conf, but I suppose the point is that it needs no configurarion. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-10 13:18 EST --- -- begin dump -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# wget http://www.hadess.net/tmp/nss-mdns/nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386.rpm --23:42:08-- http://www.hadess.net/tmp/nss-mdns/nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386.rpm Resolving www.hadess.net... 216.243.209.211 Connecting to www.hadess.net|216.243.209.211|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 26115 (26K) [application/x-rpm] Saving to: `nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386.rpm' 100%[===] 26,115 13.1K/s in 1.9s 23:42:11 (13.1 KB/s) - `nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386.rpm' saved [26115/26115] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# rpm -ivvv nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386.rpm D: == nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386.rpm D: Expected size:26115 = lead(96)+sigs(180)+pad(4)+data(25835) D: Actual size:26115 D: nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386.rpm: Header SHA1 digest: OK (2af72aea32fdac6af75793ad98824d0e916d8a17) D: added binary package [0] D: found 0 source and 1 binary packages D: opening db environment /var/lib/rpm/Packages joinenv D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Packages rdonly mode=0x0 D: locked db index /var/lib/rpm/Packages D: == +++ nss-mdns-0.8-2 i386/linux 0x1 D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Depends create mode=0x0 D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Basenames rdonly mode=0x0 D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Pubkeys rdonly mode=0x0 D: read h# 35 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: /bin/sh YES (db files) D: Requires: /bin/sh YES (cached) D: Requires: /bin/sh YES (cached) D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Providename rdonly mode=0x0 D: read h# 18 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: libc.so.6 YES (db provides) D: read h# 18 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) YES (db provides) D: read h# 18 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) YES (db provides) D: read h# 18 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)YES (db provides) D: read h# 18 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)YES (db provides) D: read h# 18 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4) YES (db provides) D: read h# 117 Header V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 4f2a6fd2 D: Requires: perl YES (db provides) D: Requires: rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1YES (rpmlib provides) D: Requires: rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 YES (rpmlib provides) D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Conflictname rdonly mode=0x0 D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Pubkeys D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Depends D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Conflictname D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Providename D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Basenames D: closed db index /var/lib/rpm/Packages D: closed db environment /var/lib/rpm/Packages D: == recording tsort relations D: == tsorting packages (order, #predecessors, #succesors, tree, depth, breadth) D: 000010 +nss-mdns-0.8-2.i386 D: installing binary packages D: opening db environment /var/lib/rpm/Packages joinenv D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Packages create mode=0x42 D: mounted filesystems: D: idevbsize bavail iavail mount point D: 0 0x0302 4096 4089983 5546087 / D: 1 0x0003 40960 -1 /proc D: 2 0x 40960 -1 /sys D: 3 0x000b 40960 -1 /dev/pts D: 4 0x0301 10248586326071 /boot D: 5 0x0013 40963184531844 /dev/shm D: 6 0x0305 4096 1308736 -1 /media/fatty D: 7 0x0014 40960 -1 /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc D: 8 0x0015 40960 -1 /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs D: sanity checking 1 elements D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Name create mode=0x42 D: running pre-transaction scripts D: computing 9 file fingerprints Preparing packages for installation... D: computing file dispositions D: opening db index /var/lib/rpm/Basenames create mode=0x42 D: == +++
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-10 15:20 EST --- Could you please attach your nsswitch.conf? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-01-11 02:28 EST --- -- begin dump -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# cat /etc/nsswitch.conf # # /etc/nsswitch.conf # # An example Name Service Switch config file. This file should be # sorted with the most-used services at the beginning. # # The entry '[NOTFOUND=return]' means that the search for an # entry should stop if the search in the previous entry turned # up nothing. Note that if the search failed due to some other reason # (like no NIS server responding) then the search continues with the # next entry. # # Legal entries are: # # nisplus or nis+ Use NIS+ (NIS version 3) # nis or yp Use NIS (NIS version 2), also called YP # dns Use DNS (Domain Name Service) # files Use the local files # db Use the local database (.db) files # compat Use NIS on compat mode # hesiod Use Hesiod for user lookups # [NOTFOUND=return] Stop searching if not found so far # # To use db, put the db in front of files for entries you want to be # looked up first in the databases # # Example: #passwd:db files nisplus nis #shadow:db files nisplus nis #group: db files nisplus nis passwd: files shadow: files group: files #hosts: db files nisplus nis dns hosts: files dns # Example - obey only what nisplus tells us... #services: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files #networks: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files #protocols: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files #rpc:nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files #ethers: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files #netmasks: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files bootparams: nisplus [NOTFOUND=return] files ethers: files netmasks: files networks: files protocols: files rpc:files services: files netgroup: files publickey: nisplus automount: files aliases:files nisplus -- end dump -- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-19 12:16 EST --- A bit outdated, but packages are there now: http://www.hadess.net/tmp/nss-mdns/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-04 04:16 EST --- I can't download the srpm, could you fix this ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-06 18:00 EST --- I would be happy to review this, with the understanding that I have no hope in hell of actually testing it properly. However, it would be nice to see some response to the issues in comment #13. Also the URLs to the spec and src.rpm don't seem to be working. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163776 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-02 21:42 EST --- On second thought others can probably do this review better and get it through. Resetting to FE-NEW. Anybody CCed want to review this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-27 23:58 EST ---
rpmlint:
W: nss-mdns summary-not-capitalized glibc plugin for .local name resolution
W: nss-mdns summary-not-capitalized glibc plugin for .local name resolution
Ignore, keep glibc.
E: nss-mdns shlib-with-non-pic-code /lib64/libnss_mdns.so.2
E: nss-mdns shlib-with-non-pic-code /lib64/libnss_mdns6_minimal.so.2
E: nss-mdns shlib-with-non-pic-code /lib64/libnss_mdns6.so.2
E: nss-mdns shlib-with-non-pic-code /lib64/libnss_mdns4_minimal.so.2
E: nss-mdns shlib-with-non-pic-code /lib64/libnss_mdns4.so.2
E: nss-mdns shlib-with-non-pic-code /lib64/libnss_mdns_minimal.so.2
I don't know enough linker-fu to fix this.
E: nss-mdns non-executable-script /usr/libexec/nss-mdns-set.pl 0644
chmod +x
W: nss-mdns percent-in-%post
W: nss-mdns percent-in-%preun
Eh? Probably the %{_libexec}
W: nss-mdns dangerous-command-in-%post mv
W: nss-mdns dangerous-command-in-%preun mv
W: nss-mdns one-line-command-in-%postun /sbin/ldconfig
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- 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
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-13 06:30 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) One of the requirements to get this included from Ulrich was that lookups are never done directly by the nss-mdns plugin, and only through avahi where it would be cached. Lennart fixed this properly in nss-mdns 0.8 Pancrazio `Ezio' de Mauro [EMAIL PROTECTED] also wrote a Perl script that will be more solid than the previous scriptlets to add and remove the mdnsminimal and mdns lines from /etc/nsswitch.conf http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/spec/nss-mdns.spec and http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/source/nss-mdns-0.8-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||191931 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|191931 | nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-13 08:04 EST --- Some links on the previous conversation: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-November/msg00805.html https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2005-December/msg00249.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||191931 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-13 08:05 EST --- Readding Chris' blocker -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-07-13 08:23 EST --- The original discussion on GMane, easier to follow. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel/30633 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 172869] Review Request: nss-mdns
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: nss-mdns https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172869 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-04-24 08:00 EST --- Fixed in: http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/spec/nss-mdns.spec http://files.hadess.net/redhat/perso/source/nss-mdns-0.7-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- 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 Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
