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=225708
--- Comment #21 from Michal Hlavinka <mhlavink(a)redhat.com> 2012-02-24 07:33:55 EST
---
(In reply to comment #20)
Some comments from comparing the built packages with my local build
(see
http://www.city-fan.org/cfo-trac/browser/dovecot/trunk):
You could include /var/run/dovecot, /var/run/dovecot/login and
/var/run/dovecot/empty as regular (not %ghost) directories in the package and
add entries for the latter two directories in the tmpfiles.d config file. There
would no longer be any need then to create/chown/restorecon those directories
in %post, and an rpm query for ownership of the directories would give the
proper answer.
I prefer it the way it is now.
The main package contains %_libexecdir/dovecot/managesieve and
%_libexecdir/dovecot/managesieve-login, which are duplicates of the ones in the
pigeonhole package.
fixed
The main package contains %_libdir/dovecot/lib90_sieve_plugin.so,
which should
be (but isn't) in the pigeonhole package.
fixed
Perhaps the main package should own the %_libdir/dovecot/settings
directory in
case any package other than the pigeonhole one wanted to drop files in there in
the future?
fixed
I have a Requires(post) for openssl for the mkcert.sh script but I
guess that's
covered by the Requires: openssl anyway?
yes
The Requires(post) and Requires(preun) of chkconfig are not needed
for
systemd-based releases.
fixed
The Requires(post) and Requires(preun) of shadow-utils are not needed
at all.
fixed
The Requires(preun) of initscripts is not needed for systemd-based
releases.
fixed
Perhaps install the pigeonhole documentation into directory
%_docdir/dovecot-pigeonhole-2.1.0 as per the rpm package name/version rather
than %_docdir/dovecot-2.1-pigeonhole-0.3.0 as per upstream naming?
I did this intentionally because it's better (at least in my opinion :)
--
Configure bugmail:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.