[Bug 431320] Review Request: pam_usb - Hardware authentication using ordinary USB Flash Drives

[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: pam_usb - Hardware authentication using ordinary USB Flash Drives


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431320


lkundrak at v3.sk changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEEDINFO                    |ASSIGNED
               Flag|needinfo?(lkundrak at v3.sk)   |




------- Additional Comments From lkundrak at v3.sk  2008-06-28 14:53 EST -------
The spec file is very nicely written and legible.
Builds in mock (tried in el5), uses compiler flags correctly.

Just a few things, probably only 1.) being a blocker, consider the other ones
just advices:

1.) RPMlint. Please correct these:

pam_usb.i386: E: non-standard-dir-perm
/usr/share/doc/pam_usb-0.4.2/pam.d-examples 0644
A standard directory should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have wrong directory permissions in some dirs
included in your package.

pam_usb.i386: E: non-standard-dir-perm /usr/share/doc/pam_usb-0.4.2 0644
A standard directory should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have wrong directory permissions in some dirs
included in your package.

pam_usb.i386: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/pamusb-conf 0754
A standard executable should have permission set to 0755. If you get this
message, it means that you have a wrong executable permissions in some files
included in your package.

2.) Use of pmount

The tool uses non-standard mechanism to escalate privileges. If the dependence
of it can not be dropped, please document the fact that this package depends on
it in %description.

3.) sed -i -e 's|/lib/security|/%{_lib}/security|' Makefile

You already patch Makefile. I suggest you move this to the patch.
Additionally, please consider renaming the patch to
<name>-<version>-<intended_use>.patch

4.) %description is too long and contains non-portable formatting

Please take into consideration, how would the description look in a gui tool,
such as pup or packagekit gui. I suggest you leave only the first paragraph sans
the last sentence of it.

-- 
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, or are watching someone who is.