[Bug 174883] Review Request: distcc -- A free distributed C/C++ compiler 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: distcc -- A free distributed C/C++ compiler system


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174883





------- Additional Comments From mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2007-03-17 14:42 EST -------
Created an attachment (id=150315)
 --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=150315&action=view)
rpmlint log for distcc-2.18.3-3.7

Well, though I have not read the previous discussion on this
bug report, I write here my first opinition.

A. About rpmlint:
   A-1 for source:
   * W: distcc strange-permission distccd.sysv 0755
     - Change to 0644.

   A-2 For binary:

   * W: distcc incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.18.3-4 2.18.3-3.7.fc7
      - Very trivial...

   * W: distcc dangerous-command-in-%preun rm
     W: distcc dangerous-command-in-%trigger ln
     W: distcc dangerous-command-in-%trigger rm
     - The following script
----------------------------------------------------
%preun
test "$1" -ne 0 || rm -f %pkgdatadir/bin/*
----------------------------------------------------
       should be treated by %ghost files. And having symlinks
       marked as %ghost files is needed anyway, otherwise these symlinks are
       regarded as being not owned by any package.

       And "rm -f %pkgdatadir/bin/*" (all glob) is too dangerous. Remove
       only the files which should really be treated by this rpm.

----------------------------------------------------
    [ ! -x /usr/bin/$c ] || ln -sf %_bindir/distcc %pkgdatadir/bin/$c
----------------------------------------------------
       - Why do you use "/usr/bin/"$c (this is not macro) and "%_bindir"/distcc

	 (here macro %_bindir is used)?

       - By the way, while "ln" and "rm" are marked as dangerous commands,
	 "unlink" is not marked as such.

    * E: distcc-server non-standard-gid /var/log/distccd.log distcc
      E: distcc-server non-root-group-log-file /var/log/distccd.log distcc
      - Fot the latter rpmlint says:
-----------------------------------------------------
If you need log files owned by a non-root group, just create a subdir in
/var/log and put your log files in it.
-----------------------------------------------------
	Perhaps you have to create /var/log/distccd directory and move
	the log files under the directory, 
	however I can see some other packages putting log files under /var/log
	with non-standard gid......

    * W: distcc-server dangerous-command-in-%post chown
      - The corresponding scripts are:
-----------------------------------------------------
%post server
test -e '%logfile' || {
	touch '%logfile'
	chown root:%username '%logfile'
	chmod 0620 '%logfile'
}
-----------------------------------------------------
	If the %logfile should always exist, then this should
	not be handled by %ghost, but should be handled by
	* this file should be touched at %install stage
	* should be handled by %verify(not md5 size mtime)
	* and chown call should be removed.

    * initrc file
-----------------------------------------------------
W: distcc-server-sysv conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/distccd
E: distcc-server-sysv executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/distccd

-----------------------------------------------------
      - Well, I remember this was discussed on fedora-????-list recently,
	and what was the conclusion?? Should rcinit file be marked as %config?
	(Is this really a %config file?)

    * Summary for -server-xinetd
------------------------------------------------------
W: distcc-server-xinetd summary-not-capitalized xinetd initscripts for the
distcc daemon
------------------------------------------------------
      - Simply change to "Xinetd initscripts...."

    + IMO the following rpmlint can be ignored.
-----------------------------------------------------
W: distcc conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/profile.d/distcc.sh
W: distcc-server conffile-without-noreplace-flag /var/log/distccd.log
E: distcc-server incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/distccd
W: distcc-server-sysv no-documentation
E: distcc-server-sysv non-standard-dir-perm /var/run/distccd 0775
W: distcc-server-sysv incoherent-init-script-name distccd
W: distcc-server-xinetd no-documentation
-----------------------------------------------------
     ... However, once please comment on these warnings.

B. Scriptlets
   * For GTK+ icon cache
     - Well, please check again the scriptlets for "GTK+ icon cache"
       http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets

C. Directory ownership
-----------------------------------------------------
  # ignore ownership of the %_datadir/icons/... directories; Core is
  # too broken to add good Requires(pre/postun).
-----------------------------------------------------
   - If you mind, you can simply add to -gnome package:
     Requires: hicolor-icon-theme

-- 
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.