On 8/28/12 7:47 PM, "Jeffrey Blank" <blank(a)eclipse.ncsc.mil> wrote:
I think you also want openscap-utils as a BuildRequires (or for
anywhere
we expect the oscap command line to be available).
Makes sense to me I'll submit an updated patch this morning.
Technically, we could install the files (and use them with a 3rd party
SCAP scanning tool) without requiring openscap or openscap-utils, though
they are definitely required for the build. I do not know if it is
proper to put them as Requires if they are not a hard requirement,
though we are definitely assuming that many users would want them in
order to run the content!
Also makes sense to strip it out of the Requires. But now I'm down to
zero deps for installation and I've had bad experiences in the past (e.g.
Vmware's RPMs that, when installed from a kickstart, ended up on the
system before coreutils and things broke spectacularly. I'll add
"filesystem" as a dependency so we can expect /usr/share/doc to exist.
As a heads up I'm also working on the SELinux content (ticket #99) and
hope to have a patch submitted today or tomorrow.
Thanks,
--Spencer
On 08/28/2012 02:50 PM, Shawn Wells wrote:
> On 8/28/12 2:17 PM, Spencer Shimko wrote:
>> The spec file was dropping things in /usr/local. Shift it to
>> /usr/share/doc/scap-security-guide-<version>.
>>
>> Update Requires and BuildRequires based on perusal of apps leveraged
>> during build.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Spencer Shimko <sshimko(a)tresys.com>
>> ---
>> scap-security-guide.spec | 15 +++++++++------
>> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/scap-security-guide.spec b/scap-security-guide.spec
>> index 55e22a5..0867fb1 100644
>> --- a/scap-security-guide.spec
>> +++ b/scap-security-guide.spec
>> @@ -12,8 +12,8 @@ BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud
>> %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XXXXXX)
>> BuildArch: %{arch}
>> -BuildRequires: /bin/rm, /bin/mkdir, /bin/cp
>> -Requires: /bin/bash, /bin/date, /usr/bin/oscap
>> +BuildRequires: coreutils, libxslt, expat, python
>> +Requires: coreutils, openscap
>> %description
>> The scap-security-guide project provides security configuration
>> guidance in
>> @@ -28,13 +28,12 @@ requirements and specific implementation guidance.
>> %build
>> cd RHEL6 && make dist
>> -
>> %install
>> rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>> #make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>> -mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/local/%{name}/
>> +mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_usr}/share/doc/%{name}-%{version}/
>> -cp -r RHEL6/dist/* $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/local/%{name}/
>> +cp -r RHEL6/dist/*
>>$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_usr}/share/doc/%{name}-%{version}/
>> %clean
>> @@ -43,10 +42,14 @@ rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
>> %files
>> %defattr(0644,root,root,0755)
>> -%attr(0755,root,root) /usr/local/scap-security-guide/
>> +%attr(0755,root,root) %{_usr}/share/doc/%{name}-%{version}/
>> %changelog
>> +* Tue Aug 28 2012 Spencer Shimko <sshimko(a)tresys.com> 1.0-4
>> +- Move away from using /usr/local for installation dir.
>> +- Fix BuildRequires and Requires.
>> +
>> * Wed Jul 3 2012 Jeffrey Blank <blank(a)eclipse.ncsc.mil> 1.0-3
>> - Modified install section, made description more concise.
>>
>
> In preparing SSG for packaging into EPEL (and eventually RHEL), one of
> the fedora guys reviewed our RPM build and dropped suggestions on making
> everything FHS compliant. They recommended things be put into
> /usr/share/lib, but I agree that /usr/share/doc is sane given the nature
> of the content. Reference
>
https://fedorahosted.org/scap-security-guide/ticket/107
>
> Jamie - Care to weigh in? Will we get smacked around by the EPEL
> packaging guys by putting this in /usr/share/doc?
> _______________________________________________
> scap-security-guide mailing list
> scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide
_______________________________________________
scap-security-guide mailing list
scap-security-guide(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide