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=809395 Juan Hernández <juan.hernan...@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Juan Hernández <juan.hernan...@redhat.com> 2012-04-04 13:29:24 EDT --- The following rpmlint errors remain: jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/jboss-as/domain/data 0775L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/jboss-as/standalone/data 0775L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/jboss-as/domain 0775L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/jboss-as/standalone/tmp 0775L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/jboss-as/domain/tmp 0775L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/jboss-as/auth 0700L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/jboss-as/domain 0770L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /etc/jboss-as/standalone 0775L jboss-as.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/log/jboss-as/standalone 0770L As I said in comment #3 I think that all these permissions have a good reason. The number of rpmlint warnings has gone from 934 to 143. The reason is that almost all the files are now owned by root:root and not root:jboss-as. Good improvement. If we don't take into account all the dangling symlink warnings (which are all false positives) there are only 41 warnings, most of them due to the root:jobss-as or jboss-as:jboss-as ownership of files that require it. The only relevant warnings that remain are the following: jboss-as.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org/jbossas HTTP Error 403: Forbidden jboss-as.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib jboss-as.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jboss-as I think that all of them are acceptable. The strange-permission warning has been removed moving the file systemd unit file to a PatchX instead of a SourceX. Nice trick, but still using "cp" and "mv" to move files around. I think it is safer to use "install -m" in order to be explicit with the permissions. All in all I don't see any good reason to block this package now, but please try to use "install -m" in the future. ================ *** APPROVED *** ================ -- 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. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
