[Bug 466183] Review Request: sblim-sfcb - Small Footprint CIM Broker

[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=466183





--- Comment #1 from Emily Ratliff <emilyr at us.ibm.com>  2008-10-08 18:14:47 EDT ---
$ rpmlint sblim-sfcb.spec 
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

$ rpmlint sblim-sfcb-1.3.2-1.src.rpm 
sblim-sfcb.src: W: non-standard-group System Tools
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

$ rpmlint sblim*rpm
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcCertificateAuthentication.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcFileRepository.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcProfileProvider.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcCimXmlCodec.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcBasicPAMAuthentication.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcClassProviderMem.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcClassProvider.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcIndCIMXMLHandler.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcBasicAuthentication.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcBrokerCore.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcInteropServerProvider.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcInteropProvider.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcInternalProvider.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libsfcUtil.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcHttpAdapter.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcQualifierProvider.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libcimcClientSfcbLocal.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcObjectImplSwapI32toP32.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/libsfcClassProviderGz.so
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: non-standard-group System Tools
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/sfcb
sblim-sfcb.i386: W: incoherent-init-script-name sfcb
sblim-sfcb-schema.i386: W: no-documentation
sblim-sfcb-schema.i386: W: non-standard-group System Tools
sblim-sfcb-schema.i386: W: invalid-license Distributed Management Task Force
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 25 warnings.

I believe that the warnings about the libraries are all false positives because
sfcb loads support libraries as needed. They are not development libraries. (19
warnings)

I left the init script named sfcb rather than sblim-sfcb because that is what
upstream does and that is what other community distros do. (2 warnings)

My understanding is that the group name doesn't really matter. (2 warnings)

The schema is copyright DMTF, see Release notes
http://www.dmtf.org/standards/cim/cim_schema_v219/ReleaseNotes.html (1 warning)

I left the schema package as a subpackage follow upstream's lead - advise on
whether this is correct or not would be appreciated.

-- 
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.