[Bug 833411] Review Request: realmd - Kerberos realm enrollment service

[bugzilla@xxxxxxxxxx]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=833411

--- Comment #4 from Stef Walter <stefw@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> try rpmlint on the result:  (here is an excerpt)

Oddly enough, my rpmlint doesn't show those warnings:

[stef@stef-rawhide rpm]$ rpmlint SPECS/realmd.spec 
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

> realmd.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency PackageKit-glib
> realmd.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency glib2
> realmd.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency krb5-libs
> realmd.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.3 ['0.3-1.fc18', '0.3-1']
> 
> You don't need to include explicit deps on shared libraries which will be
> picked up by the rpm dep generator.

Interesting. Thanks, removed them.

> Also from 
> BuildRequires:  automake libtool intltool pkgconfig
> you only need intltool   Unless you auto(make/conf/reconf).

We do run pkg-config, or is that build requirement automatically provided?

> Explicit BuildRoot: tag is not needed since a release or two ago.
> Same for %defattr(-,root,root,-)
> Same for the explicit rm -f %{buildroot} in the start of %clean or %install
> Group:   is obosolete

Removed all those lines.

> You should own %{_libdir}/realmd, as in
> %dir %{_libdir}/realmd
> and
> %dir %{_libdir}/realmd/provider.d

Done.

(In reply to comment #2)
> and %doc AUTHORS COPYING ChangeLog NEWS README
> seems like a better fit than empty docs

Done.

(In reply to comment #3)
> I've looked through some of the source files and they all look like LGPLv2+
> not LGPLv2

Thanks, updated the License: line.

Updated spec file: http://people.freedesktop.org/~stefw/rpm/realmd.spec
New SRPM: http://people.freedesktop.org/~stefw/rpm/realmd-0.3-2.fc17.src.rpm

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review