[Bug 226198] Merge Review: nfs-utils

[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: nfs-utils


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226198


bugzilla at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |medium
           Priority|normal                      |medium




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-05-05 22:20 EST -------
Wow, looks like I had planned to add more to this ticket and then promptly ran out of time for a couple of months.  Here's where we're at.

Some strange-permission warnings in the srpm, which should be OK.

Several rpmlint issues with the built RPM:

E: nfs-utils executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/nfs
E: nfs-utils executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/nfslock
E: nfs-utils executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcgssd
E: nfs-utils executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcidmapd
E: nfs-utils executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcsvcgssd
W: nfs-utils conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/nfs
W: nfs-utils conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/nfslock
W: nfs-utils conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcgssd
W: nfs-utils conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcidmapd
W: nfs-utils conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcsvcgssd
  The current packaging guidelines indicate that init files should be
  executable and should not be marked %config.

E: nfs-utils zero-length /var/lib/nfs/rmtab
E: nfs-utils zero-length /var/lib/nfs/etab
E: nfs-utils zero-length /var/lib/nfs/state
E: nfs-utils zero-length /var/lib/nfs/xtab
  Generally we don't ship zero-length files, but I guess something has to be
  installed there and I'm not sure if the files can contain comments.

E: nfs-utils setuid-binary /sbin/mount.nfs root 04755
E: nfs-utils setuid-binary /sbin/umount.nfs root 04755
E: nfs-utils setuid-binary /sbin/mount.nfs4 root 04755
E: nfs-utils setuid-binary /sbin/umount.nfs4 root 04755
E: nfs-utils non-standard-executable-perm /sbin/mount.nfs 04755
E: nfs-utils non-standard-executable-perm /sbin/umount.nfs 04755
E: nfs-utils non-standard-executable-perm /sbin/mount.nfs4 04755
E: nfs-utils non-standard-executable-perm /sbin/umount.nfs4 04755
E: nfs-utils non-readable /var/lib/nfs/state 0600
E: nfs-utils non-standard-uid /var/lib/nfs/statd rpcuser
E: nfs-utils non-standard-gid /var/lib/nfs/statd rpcuser
E: nfs-utils non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/nfs/statd 0700
   These are OK.

E: nfs-utils explicit-lib-dependency libevent
E: nfs-utils explicit-lib-dependency libgssapi
  I'm not sure I understand these.  What's the point of putting just a library
  dependency in Requires(pre)?  If something in %pre needs those libraries,
  won't it have its own dependencies?

W: nfs-utils incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0.12-4 1:1.0.12-4.fc7
  rpmlint is complaining about not seeing the epoch inthe changelog entry 
  I don't think this it's a big deal.

W: nfs-utils dangerous-command-in-%pre mv
  I wonder if we still support upgrading from anything old enough to need that
  bit in %pre.  It looks like FC4 still used "rpc.*" while FC5 uses "rpc*", so
  we probably still need it.

W: nfs-utils dangerous-command-in-%preun userdel
  The guidelines for this aren't finished yet, but general sentiment is that
  we shouldn't delete service users.  It's obvious if uninstalling the package
  would leave unowned files

W: nfs-utils service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/nfslock
W: nfs-utils service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcidmapd
W: nfs-utils service-default-enabled /etc/rc.d/init.d/rpcgssd
  Generally it's bad if merely installing a package results in a running
  service, but this is the nfs client and perhaps Red Hat has some other policy
  here.

W: nfs-utils no-reload-entry /etc/rc.d/init.d/nfslock
  I've always wondered why that script is missing reload.

Honestly, besides those rpmlint bits and the above question about the nfs.doc
tarball, I think this package is fine.


-- 
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.