[Bug 176253] Review Request: clement-2.1
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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: clement-2.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176253
------- Additional Comments From j.w.r.degoede(a)hhs.nl 2006-08-13 17:10 EST -------
(In reply to comment #14)
> We need to be consistent here:
> rpmlint is complaining about putting an application in setuid how could
> you suggest to do this?
> Clement is started un root priviledges and lets them go as soon
> proper port (SMTP) are open, to do this it seteuid with the application program
> ownership. So there is NO purpose to put clement setuid, not from the
> security stand point, not from the rpmlint stand point, not from application
> stand point.
>
I think you understood me wrong here, I didn't want to suggest to make
%attr(-,mail,mail) %{_usr}/bin/%{name} setuid, I thought it was setuid and that
was why it has owner and group mail, if its not setuid, then why not just owner
and group root?
> file in %{_usr}/lib are shell for clement application (utilities, support),
> shell are not archs dependent.
>
OK.
You still haven't explained why you do:
%attr(-,mail,mail) %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/
Instead of just:
%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/
Or is that just a copy and paste error and will you fix that with the next version?
--
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.
17 years, 9 months
[Bug 187236] Review Request: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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: smixer - A simple interface to /dev/mixer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187236
bugzilla(a)redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package-
|list(a)redhat.com |review(a)redhat.com
tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tibbs(a)math.uh.edu
------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-08-12 23:09 EST -------
So what's up here? Does this still need a review or should it be dropped?
--
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.
17 years, 9 months
[Bug 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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: mysql-connector-net
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177512
tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |tibbs(a)math.uh.edu
------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-08-12 22:44 EST -------
It's been some months now with no reviewer input. I propose that we invoke the
stalled review policy and assign this back to the phantom address so that
someone else can have a go at it. I'll do this in a week unless the assignee
indicates otherwise.
--
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.
17 years, 9 months
[Bug 177104] Review Request: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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: abook - Text-based addressbook program for mutt
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177104
tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink(a)leemhuis.info |tibbs(a)math.uh.edu
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-08-12 20:29 EST -------
I'll go ahead and take a look at this.
It builds fine in mock; rpmlint on the SRPM has this to say:
W: abook macro-in-%changelog rlz1
W: abook macro-in-%changelog rlz1
W: abook macro-in-%changelog rlz1
W: abook macro-in-%changelog rlz1
W: abook macro-in-%changelog rlz1
You just need to double some percent signs.
E: abook no-cleaning-of-buildroot
You should clean out $RPM_BUILD_ROOT at the beginning of %install.
rpmlint on the built RPM is quiet.
* source files match upstream:
87d25df96864a7c507a4965e6d1da49d abook-0.5.6.tar.gz
* package meets naming and packaging guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* debuginfo package looks complete.
X rpmlint has valid complaints
* final provides and requires are sane:
abook = 0.5.6-1.fc6
=
libncursesw.so.5()(64bit)
libreadline.so.5()(64bit)
lynx
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream
* no shared libraries are present.
* package is not relocatable.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no libtool .la droppings.
* not a GUI app.
* locale files present; fing_lang used appropriately.
--
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.
17 years, 9 months
[Bug 185205] Review Request: nqc
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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: nqc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185205
tibbs(a)math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
OtherBugsDependingO|163779 |201449
nThis| |
------- Additional Comments From tibbs(a)math.uh.edu 2006-08-12 18:28 EST -------
Rick, go ahead and make a new submission for your package. You can close this
as a duplicate of the new bug.
--
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.
17 years, 9 months
[Bug 176253] Review Request: clement-2.1
by Red Hat Bugzilla
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: clement-2.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176253
------- Additional Comments From jmp(a)safe.ca 2006-08-12 09:01 EST -------
We need to be consistent here:
rpmlint is complaining about putting an application in setuid how could
you suggest to do this?
Clement is started un root priviledges and lets them go as soon
proper port (SMTP) are open, to do this it seteuid with the application program
ownership. So there is NO purpose to put clement setuid, not from the
security stand point, not from the rpmlint stand point, not from application
stand point.
file in %{_usr}/lib are shell for clement application (utilities, support),
shell are not archs dependent.
--
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.
17 years, 9 months