[Bug 171289] Review Request: dirmngr: Client for Managing/Downloading CRLs

[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: dirmngr: Client for Managing/Downloading CRLs


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=171289


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|gdk at redhat.com              |tibbs at math.uh.edu
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2006-06-25 18:42 EST -------
Builds in mock; rpmlint has this to day:

E: dirmngr zero-length /etc/dirmngr/ldapservers.conf
Is is possible to add a comment or something to this file indicating what its
purpose is?

W: dirmngr file-not-utf8 /usr/share/info/dirmngr.info.gz
Just a few non-ascii charaters; a run through iconv should fix it up.

W: dirmngr log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/dirmngr.log
You'll want to make sure these get rotated properly.

W: dirmngr non-standard-dir-in-usr libexec
This seems OK given the currently accepted uses of /usr/libexec.

Did you ever decide what do to about running this as a daemon?
You don't seem to package the COPYING file.

Note that 0.9.4 is out.  Care to make an update that fixes the above issues?

Review:
* 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.
X license is open source-compatible.  License text included in tarball but not
in package.
* source files match upstream:
   54df92f0548918af89c8c7dcca2d1911  dirmngr-0.9.3.tar.bz2
X latest version is not being packaged (0.9.4 is out)
* BuildRequires are proper.
* package builds in mock (x86_64, development).
X rpmlint has valid complaints
* final provides and requires are sane:
   config(dirmngr) = 0.9.3-1.fc6
   dirmngr = 0.9.3-1.fc6
  =
   /bin/sh
   /sbin/install-info
   config(dirmngr) = 0.9.3-1.fc6
   libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit)
   libgcrypt.so.11(GCRYPT_1.2)(64bit)
   libgpg-error.so.0()(64bit)
   libksba.so.8()(64bit)
   libksba.so.8(KSBA_0.9)(64bit)
   liblber-2.3.so.0()(64bit)
   libldap-2.3.so.0()(64bit)
   libpth.so.20()(64bit)
* 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.
* %clean is present.
* %check not present; no test suite upstream.  There are some tests, but they
don't seem to be anything that runs in an automatic fashoin.
* scriptlets present and OK (install-info)
* 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.

-- 
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.