[Freeipa-devel] [PATCHES] Support for RPM generation in SSSD

[Jakub Hrozek]

On Wed, 2009-02-18 at 19:40 -0500, Simo Sorce wrote:
>  > rpmlint now outputs this:
> > ---
> > sssd.i386: W: no-documentation
> > sssd.i386: W:
> >
> non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.freeipa.sssd.infopipe.conf
> 
> how does dbus mark these files ?

I don't think I follow you on this. Dbus doesn't own any of these files,
they are owned by different packages. Some of them mark them as %config,
some of them don't.. I tend not to think about it as typical
configuration file that should be edited by admin, so I didn't mark it
as %config, but I can be wrong.

> 
> > sssd.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libsss_proxy.so
> > sssd.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/memberof.so
> > sssd.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libsysdb.so
> 
> these libraries are in the wrong place for a start, they should be
> under
> a package private library path as they are never meant to be used by
> any
> other application, I tentatively put them under /ust/lib/sssd/ on my
> machine.
> 
> > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
> > ---
> > 
> > I think that's OK, there really is no documentation so far, dbus
> conf
> > files are typically not marked as %config and no-soname is not a
> > packaging issue, I think.
> 
> See above, we should probably build tehse libraries versioned
> (.so.0.0.1), and then just make the .so a symlink anyway.
> 

Done in the attached revision. There's a versioned library symlinked
from soname-named file (.so.0) and versionless (.so). 

Also the macros are now called HAVE_INFOPIPE and HAVE_POLICYKIT as
Stephen suggested in the other mail.

Jakub
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Adding-support-for-generating-RPMS-for-sssd.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 15647 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20090219/48503c68/attachment.bin>