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=730815 --- Comment #2 from Robert Scheck <redhat-bugzilla(a)linuxnetz.de&gt; 2011-08-22 19:01:47 EDT --- Yes, I know this. Nevertheless it's still a helpful tool for PAM related tests. -- 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.

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=730815 Michael Scherer <misc(a)zarb.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |needinfo+ --- Comment #3 from Michael Scherer <misc(a)zarb.org&gt; 2012-03-04 09:49:04 EST --- Package Review ============== Key: - = N/A x = Pass ! = Fail ? = Not evaluated ==== C/C++ ==== [x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: MUST Package contains no static executables. [x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. [x]: MUST Package is not relocatable. ==== Generic ==== [x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 [x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required [x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content. [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required [x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict. [x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: MUST Package installs properly. [x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary. [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. rpmlint pamtester-debuginfo-0.1.2-1.fc18.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc18.i686.rpm pamtester.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d pamtester.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US facto -> fact, factor, facts pamtester.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centralised -> centralized, centralist, centralism 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. rpmlint pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc18.src.rpm pamtester.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d pamtester.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US facto -> fact, factor, facts pamtester.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centralised -> centralized, centralist, centralism 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. [x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. /home/misc/730815/pamtester-0.1.2.tar.gz : MD5SUM this package : f441a6617cbc640ea02f3e22058c0461 MD5SUM upstream package : f441a6617cbc640ea02f3e22058c0461 [x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one. [x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present. [x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [x]: SHOULD Package functions as described. [x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL. [-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead of %define. Issues: [!]: MUST Buildroot is not present Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5 [!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 Note: defattr(....) present in %files section. This is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed [!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent. rpmlint pamtester-debuginfo-0.1.2-1.fc18.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc18.i686.rpm pamtester.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d pamtester.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US facto -> fact, factor, facts pamtester.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centralised -> centralized, centralist, centralism 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. rpmlint pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc18.src.rpm pamtester.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de -> DE, ed, d pamtester.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US facto -> fact, factor, facts pamtester.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US centralised -> centralized, centralist, centralism 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. So, to summarize : - remove BuildRoot - remove %defattr, unless you want to push it to EPEL 5 -- 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.

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=730815 Michael Scherer <misc(a)zarb.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review?, needinfo+ |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Michael Scherer <misc(a)zarb.org&gt; 2012-03-04 14:08:21 EST --- Ok, so the package is good for me to be sent to the package collection. -- 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.

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=730815 Robert Scheck <redhat(a)linuxnetz.de&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Robert Scheck <redhat(a)linuxnetz.de&gt; 2012-03-20 18:50:54 EDT --- Michael, thank you very much for the review and for pinging me :) New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: pamtester Short Description: Utility to test Pluggable Authentication Modules (PAM) Owners: robert Branches: el5 el6 f15 f16 f17 InitialCC: -- 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.

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=730815 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- 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.

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=730815 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; 2012-03-21 13:39:22 EDT --- pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc15 -- 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.

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=730815 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; 2012-03-21 13:39:25 EDT --- pamtester-0.1.2-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pamtester-0.1.2-1.el6 -- 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.

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=730815 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; 2012-03-21 21:57:45 EDT --- pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository. -- 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.

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=730815 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc15 |pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc16 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; 2012-04-07 23:31:03 EDT --- pamtester-0.1.2-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- 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.

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=730815 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|pamtester-0.1.2-1.el6 |pamtester-0.1.2-1.el5 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; 2012-04-08 13:04:07 EDT --- pamtester-0.1.2-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- 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.