[Bug 226190] Merge Review: netatalk

[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: Merge Review: netatalk


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226190





------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-05-05 17:09 EST -------
I checked what's in CVS currently; I'll check over the issues that popped up in the previous review.  First, a few remaining rpmlint warnings:

W: netatalk devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/netatalk-config
  Actually it's now in both packages, because this:
    %{_bindir}/*
  in the regular package pulls it in.
  An %exclude fixes it up; I moved the manpage over to -devel as well.

E: netatalk wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/doc/netatalk-2.0.3/ICDumpSuffixMap "perl"
  Still around.  Not sure what's up here.  I note this file is included as
  Source4, but it's also in contrib.  My suggestion would be to drop Source4
  and use the script from contrib, but fix up the line endings and #!perl call.

E: netatalk wrong-script-interpreter
/usr/share/doc/netatalk-2.0.3/ICDumpSuffixMap "perl"
E: netatalk executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/atalk
E: netatalk setuid-binary /usr/bin/afppasswd root 04755
E: netatalk non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/afppasswd 04755
W: netatalk conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/atalk
W: netatalk incoherent-init-script-name atalk
W: netatalk-devel no-documentation

E: netatalk executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/atalk
W: netatalk conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/atalk
  The guidelines have actually changed now; init scripts must not be marked as
  %config.

E: netatalk setuid-binary /usr/bin/afppasswd root 04755
E: netatalk non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/afppasswd 04755
W: netatalk incoherent-init-script-name atalk
W: netatalk mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 2, tab: line 19)
  These are all OK.

* Buildroot is fine now.  (In any case, he buildroot guidelines ended up being
  considerably loosened since the the initial review was done.)

* Dependencies look good.

* ldconfig is now called as necessary.

* We now have guidelines for static libraries; they should not be included at
  but if there is a justifiable reason for why they absolutely must be
  included, they must be in a -static subpackage and only then after approval
  of FESCO.

I'll attach a patch which fixes these issues, but it also removes all of the
static libaries and .la files.  If you're convinced that they're necessary,
you'll need to ask FESCO for an exception.  I need to run now and it may be a
couple of hours before I can get that patch uploaded.


-- 
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.