[Bug 226228] Merge Review: pam

Fri Jan 11 21:16:48 UTC 2008

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: pam

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226228

------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com  2008-01-11 16:16 EST -------
See below - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
See below - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License
OK - License field in spec matches
See below - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
a6472db4afe13850cb401922211bba4e  ./Linux-PAM-0.99.8.1.tar.bz2
a6472db4afe13850cb401922211bba4e  ./Linux-PAM-0.99.8.1.tar.bz2.1
6b5fc356fdbb0b7cdbbdc80419043cac  ./Linux-PAM-0.99.8.1.tar.bz2.sign
6b5fc356fdbb0b7cdbbdc80419043cac  ./Linux-PAM-0.99.8.1.tar.bz2.sign.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install

OK - Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
OK - .so files in -devel subpackage.
OK - -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
OK - .la files are removed.

OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
See below - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane.

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should function as described.
OK - Should have sane scriptlets.
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
15 open bugs - check for outstanding bugs on package.

Issues:

1. I see that upstream is named Linux-PAM. Perhaps consider re-naming it?

2. Might add a comment about why this package needs it's own private copy
of the db package.

3. shouldn't the license of pam_tty_audit.c be GPLv2 per RedHat guidelines?

4. Can some of the tests and such be moved from the install section to a %test
section?
like the dlopen tests and so forth.

5. Might ask upstream to include a copy of the GPL COPYING file too.

6. Why strip the binaries?
# Forcibly strip binaries.
strip $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_sbindir}/* ||:

debuginfo should pull that out.

7. Might note that we can depreciate the pre/post hacks for USEMD5 after a while.

8. No need to require 'coreutils'.

9. 15 open bugs
You might look at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=218063
and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428444 in particular.

10. rpmlint says:

pam.src:212: E: use-of-RPM_SOURCE_DIR

You should be able to remove the following lines from prep:
cp %{SOURCE5} .
cp %{SOURCE6} .
cp %{SOURCE7} .

Just refer to the sources directly when installing.

Ignore:

pam.src:246: E: hardcoded-library-path in $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/lib/security
pam.src:327: E: hardcoded-library-path in /lib/security
pam.src: W: strange-permission dlopen.sh 0755
pam.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /sbin/pam_timestamp_check root 04755
pam.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /sbin/pam_timestamp_check 04755
pam.x86_64: E: executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/security/namespace.init
pam.x86_64: E: non-readable /sbin/unix_update 0700
pam.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /sbin/unix_update 0700
pam.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /sbin/unix_chkpwd root 04755
pam.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /sbin/unix_chkpwd 04755
pam.x86_64: E: non-readable /etc/security/opasswd 0600
pam.x86_64: W: log-files-without-logrotate /var/log/faillog
pam.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/security/console.perms
pam.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/security/console.perms.d/50-default.perms
pam.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%post rm
pam.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/security/opasswd

Fix if you like:

pam.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 130, tab: line 137)

11. Might add a %{?_smp_mflags} to make?

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.