[Bug 428823] Review Request: sectool - A security audit system and intrusion detection system

[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: sectool - A security audit system and intrusion detection system


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428823





------- Additional Comments From mitr at redhat.com  2008-01-16 13:03 EST -------
* rpmlint output:
> sectool-gui.noarch: W: no-documentation
OK

* License: The field was changed to GPLv2+, but the code still does not contain
  copyright notices specifying the intended license.  The License: field might
  be sufficient - but just to be sure, please add a copyright header to each
  source file, per the RH copyright guidelines

* macros:
> Consider using macros for paths; at least you can
> (make PREFIX=%{_prefix} ...and so on for other variables),
> perhaps add more variables to the Makefile to remove other hard-coded
> directory paths like /etc, /usr/bin and /var/lib/sectool and /usr/share
-2 is not an improvement in this regard: macros are used in %files and
hard-coded paths in the Makefile: if the macro values change, the build will 
break.  For each path, either use a hard-coded path both in the Makefile and the
spec, or use a macro in the spec and pass the macro value to the Makefile somehow.

(If you decide this isn't worth it and revert to using hard-coded paths, I won't
protest.)


> Note, I didn't update web pages(wiki). If new rpm pass review, I'll do that.
OK.  (In the future, please don't change released tarballs like this - it might
become quite a mess if different distributions use different tarballs with the
same version number.)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.