[Bug 500746] Review Request: 389-admin - renamed from fedora-ds-admin

[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=500746





--- Comment #4 from Rich Megginson <rmeggins at redhat.com>  2009-05-18 16:19:24 EDT ---
Updated

Source URL: http://port389.org/sources/389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2
md5sum 389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2
81c41383af361e5591650edb38c3f3d8  389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2
sha1sum 389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2 
f1ac01ab09afb65d929f4552951240a1c246971d  389-admin-1.1.7.tar.bz2

SRPM URL: http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/389-admin-1.1.7-5.src.rpm

Other files mentioned in Source in the spec file are in
http://rmeggins.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview

389-admin.src: W: strange-permission 389-admin-git.sh 0775
- Fixed - see new SRPM above

389-admin.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%post chmod
- this is to work around a bug in rpm - if you mark a file/directory as
config(noreplace) rpm will preserve the file contents, but not the
ownership/permissions.

389-admin.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name dirsrv-admin
- this is intentional - we did not want the service name to be the same as the
package name because we knew we were going to change the package name

389-admin.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
/usr/lib64/libds-admin-serv.so.0.0.0 PR_vsnprintf
- How can I fix these?  Do they need to be fixed?  AFAICT fedora-ds-admin has
been running with this "problem" for years with no ill effects.

-- 
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.