[Bug 188138] Review Request: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon

[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: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188138


bugzilla at redhat.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Product|Fedora Extras               |Fedora

tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |
              nThis|                            |
               Flag|                            |fedora-review?




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2007-06-19 23:55 EST -------
This is an old one, and its really a very simple package.  Let me take a look....

The URL: seems to be invalid.
rpmlint says:
   W: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 13, tab: 
      line 1)
No big deal; fix it if you like.

   W: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind-debuginfo filename-too-long-for-joliet 
     mod_auth_ntlm_winbind-debuginfo-0.0.0-0.1.20070129svn713.fc8.x86_64.rpm
I'm not sure there's anything you can do about this, nor do I know if this
actually causes any problems.

It's actually more useful to do "svn export" instead of "svn co" to get an
updated source tree, because it doesn't give you a bunch of useless .svn
directories.

You need a Requires(post): /usr/sbin/usermod (or shadow-utils).  Frankly I'm not
sure if rpm will guarantee that apache is installed before this package so that
the %post scriptlet will actually run, and I think that should be confirmed with
an expert first.  I don't have any particular issue with this package changing
the apache users' group list, however.

Review:
* source files match upstream.
  I did an svn export and diffed the directories manually.
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.  (The upstream version really 
  is 0.0.0.)
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged (The SVN ID of the upstream repository is 754 
  as I do this review, but none of the files in this package have been chaned as 
  far as I can tell.)
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (development, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint has only acceptable complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   config(mod_auth_ntlm_winbind) = 0.0.0-0.1.20070129svn713.fc8
   mod_auth_ntlm_winbind.so()(64bit)
   mod_auth_ntlm_winbind = 0.0.0-0.1.20070129svn713.fc8
  =
   /bin/sh
   config(mod_auth_ntlm_winbind) = 0.0.0-0.1.20070129svn713.fc8
   httpd >= 2.0.40
   httpd-mmn = 20051115
   samba-common
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  I have no means to test this 
  package.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

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