[Bug 552331] Review Request: piranha - Tools for administration of Linux Virtual Server
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=552331
--- Comment #4 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2010-01-09 09:28:34 EST
---
- Please don't forget to bump the release number, otherwise it's just
confusing!
- Remove shadow-utils from Requires(postun) as well (as I wrote before).
- Use %{_initddir} instead of %{_initrddir}, read:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript#Initscripts_on_the_filesystem
- Fix %config(noreplace)
/etc/logrotate.d/piranha
= %config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/logrotate.d/piranha
- patches documentation still missing
- /etc/sysconfig misuse still unhandled
- Remove the unnecessary Requires: popt (this will be added automatically by
rpm)
- Looking forward to see the new sources solving the licensing issues...
--
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@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 552331] Review Request: piranha - Tools for administration of Linux Virtual Server
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=552331 --- Comment #3 from Marek Grac mg...@redhat.com 2010-01-08 11:52:27 EDT --- New build in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1909778 all errors removed, warnings with symlinks still remains. Author of send_arp.c was contacted and he wrote that he already give permission to use it under BSD + GPL licenses. I will create a new upstream version with correct licensing + incorporated patches. Please let me know if there are any other problems with this package. -- 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@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 552331] Review Request: piranha - Tools for administration of Linux Virtual Server
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=552331 --- Comment #1 from Marek Grac mg...@redhat.com 2010-01-04 13:04:09 EDT --- Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1901427 -- 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@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 552331] Review Request: piranha - Tools for administration of Linux Virtual Server
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=552331 Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||xja...@fi.muni.cz Flag||fedora-review? -- 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@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 552331] Review Request: piranha - Tools for administration of Linux Virtual Server
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=552331 Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|xja...@fi.muni.cz -- 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@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 552331] Review Request: piranha - Tools for administration of Linux Virtual Server
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=552331
--- Comment #2 from Milos Jakubicek xja...@fi.muni.cz 2010-01-04 14:15:15
EDT ---
So:
* first, please make rpmlint happy:
rpmlint piranha.spec
piranha.spec: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 80, tab: line 85)
rpmlint ../RPMS/x86_64/piranha-*.rpm
piranha-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-url-tag
piranha.x86_64: W: no-url-tag
(add URL tag)
piranha.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /etc/sysconfig/ha/modules
/usr/lib64/httpd/modules
This seems to be ok, the target is provided by httpd which is required, but see
my comment at the very end.
piranha.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/piranha 0775
Fix this please.
piranha.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/sbin/piranha_gui /usr/sbin/httpd
This is ok, as previously, though the _gui suffix isn't really motivating for
being linked to apache.
piranha.x86_64: E: zero-length /var/log/piranha/piranha-gui
piranha.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/sysconfig/ha/lvs.cf
Zero-length files shouldn't be packaged, either provide some default
configuration (or at least explanation what users should use them for!) in them
or remove them.
piranha.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/piranha-httpd
Your logrotate file should be named /etc/logrotate.d/package name.
piranha.x86_64: E: zero-length /var/log/piranha/piranha-gui-access
Likewise.
piranha.x86_64: E: non-readable /usr/sbin/piranha-passwd 0700
piranha.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/sbin/piranha-passwd 0700
The file doesn't seem to contain passwords = should be 755.
piranha.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%postun userdel
Users/groups must not be removed after package removal, refer to:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:UsersAndGroups
btw, you can also use getent to check whether a given user/group exists (see
the examples on the above referenced page).
Don't forget to remove shadow-utils from Requires(postun) as well.
piranha.x86_64: W: no-reload-entry /etc/rc.d/init.d/piranha-gui
In your init script (/etc/rc.d/init.d/your_file), you don't have a 'reload'
entry, which is necessary for good functionality.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript
* please refer to Source and Patch policy here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
* use macros in the %files section
(https://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Packaging:RPMMacros) --
%{_sysconfdir}, %{_sbindir}, %{_initddir}, %{_initddir}, %{_localstatedir}
* there is quite a mess what concerns licensing -- some source files (pulse.c,
linkstate.c, nanny.c) refer to GPLv2+ (not just GPLv2), most refer to
unspecified version of GPL (fos.c, lvsconfig.c, main.c, lvsd.c, util.c). Two
files have quite problematic licensing: ipvs_exec.c contains just Copyright
1999 Red Hat Inc., and send_arp.c contains funny licensing which however could
be troublesome (there were some cases that packages didn't pass review because
you couldn't use them to prepare nuclear war or something like that).
To sum up = Everywhere should be a licensed fully specified, I guess you
wanted GPLv2+. Can you satisfy this condition for send_arp.c? If not, I'd ask
spot what to do with this.
* directory layout: the package misuses /etc/sysconfig heavily. The apache
configuration files should placed under /etc/httpd/conf.d, web and logs
should be moved to /usr/share. What's the purpose of the modules symlink?
= There shouldn't be anything besides the pulse in /etc/sysconfig.
--
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@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
