[Bug 182744] Review Request: libnasl - Nessus Attack Scripting Language

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: libnasl - Nessus Attack Scripting Language


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=182744


jpmahowald at gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|bugzilla-sink at leemhuis.info |jpmahowald at gmail.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163779
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From jpmahowald at gmail.com  2006-03-18 00:14 EST -------
A number of compile warnings due to integers and pointers. It'd be nice if
upstream fixed them.

Minor:
* Duplicate BuildRequires: libpcap (by nessus-libraries-devel), tetex-dvips (by
tetex-latex)


Good:

- rpmlint checks return:

rpmlint of libnasl:
W: libnasl non-conffile-in-etc /etc/pki/nessus/nessus_org.pem
not really conf file, can ignore

rpmlint of libnasl-devel:
E: libnasl-devel only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
symlink, can ignore

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (GPL) OK, text in %doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86_64)
- no missing BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- no need for .desktop file

- devel package ok
- no .la files
- post/postun ldconfig ok
- devel requires base package n-v-r 

APPROVED

-- 
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.