[Bug 505155] Review Request: libcap-ng - An alternative posix capabilities library

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505155





--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola <jussi.lehtola at iki.fi>  2009-06-11 08:53:51 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> wrt to comment #1 item 1, power supply on that server burned up and hasn't been
> replaced. Updated the spec file to point to my people page for now. Items 2-4
> are also fixed. For item 5, all example rpms that I looked at have the .so file
> in /lib64 if the library is there also. Is there a guideline that says this is
> wrong or something bad that will happen if I don't? IOW, what are the problems
> caused by leaving it in /lib64?

That's not a standard location according to FHS. You have been looking only at
some core utilities spec files, everything else installs the libraries in
%{_libdir}. Using %{_lib} for anything else is forbidden.

> wrt to comment #2 item 1, No. Item 2 is fixed. Item 3, I like explicit
> attributes so that when I look at the specfile I know exactly how everything is
> going to land just in case there is a mistake in the make files. (I can point
> to bz on the prelude stack where explicit perms would have prevented doing
> security errata.)

But the normal umasks set by the build environment are fine.

> Item 5, I don't see any spec files doing this. Why would
> build-time timestamps be important? I can see the reason for multilib timestamp
> coordination for shared resources, but why would I need to do this?

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps

It's a guideline and thus mandatory. Files that aren't generated in the build
(e.g. the header file) need to keep their time stamps. This package will also
be multilib, won't it?

> Thanks for the review comments. I posted a new spec file to the same place as
> above, but won't update the srpm until later today after I put some man pages
> in the tarball and do an official release.  

You didn't increment the release, which you should do whenever making
revisions.

-- 
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.