[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #34 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: monitorix New Branches: epel7 Owners: cicku mikaku -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #35 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc18 |monitorix-3.2.1-1.el6 --- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.1-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=G5TiGnYqCMa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.1-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/monitorix-3.2.1-1.el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mdPhJ1ZF7Da=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc19 |monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc18 --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=wt3FHu66G4a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc19 Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2013-05-31 23:18:08 --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kz1cmIzmsza=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | Flags||fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fGlfQg4yA1a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #27 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=KHbnlb8uDda=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=vdNW0rcXaha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.0-2.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/monitorix-3.2.0-2.el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=u73S812oRHa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #21 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git setup complete. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=UoLTs02WIha=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mPZ8Sh2E11a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #22 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #21) Git setup complete. Jon, it seems you used to change fedora-cvs to '+', not just remove the flag. Any mistake? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GRUzvTh7Jca=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #23 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Robin Lee from comment #22) (In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #21) Git setup complete. Jon, it seems you used to change fedora-cvs to '+', not just remove the flag. Any mistake? It doesn't matter because bugzilla had some problem yesterday so Jon manually added the SCM. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=aL9ONs5Ep8a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #24 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Package Change Request == Package Name: monitorix New Branches: el6 Owners: cicku -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=aUGCBkHW66a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rbcvoSDMRPa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hWZcwkYB5wa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hoqOtcm0MOa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071
--- Comment #17 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com ---
OK.
I dropped the %{S:1,2} and use the default one.
Add %dir for directories ownership
Fix filtering.
New SPEC URL: http://cicku.me/monitorix.spec
New SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/monitorix-3.2.0-2.fc20.src.rpm
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hrKyfjcJE6a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071
Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #18 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com ---
Approved by cheeselee.
Some additional remind:
* Write more serious and meaningful changelog.
* Write a line of comment for why hard coding /usr/lib instead of %{_libdir}
for this package.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PUYFsJtiIXa=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071
--- Comment #19 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Robin Lee from comment #18)
Approved by cheeselee.
Some additional remind:
* Write more serious and meaningful changelog.
Will be done in SCM.
* Write a line of comment for why hard coding /usr/lib instead of %{_libdir}
for this package.
Oh, I should ask the author..
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Ht4OvmFKCea=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #20 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: monitorix Short Description: A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool Owners: cicku Branches: f18 f19 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Wb1YXbgjoKa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #15 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Hi Robin, 1)Upstream provide a not good system unit file IMO, and logrotate file also. 2)Fixed. 3)I don't know if I create the sub packages I should Add Requires for httpd or lighthttpd? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=tTaHCjxYuBa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #16 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com --- (In reply to Christopher Meng from comment #15) Hi Robin, 1)Upstream provide a not good system unit file IMO, and logrotate file also. Since upstream provides equivalent files, you should provide patches instead of replacing files. And then patches must be sent upstream and each come with a comment in the specfile. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment 3)I don't know if I create the sub packages I should Add Requires for httpd or lighthttpd? I don't fill splitting sub-packages is a necessary and perfect enhancement for this package. Just go ahead with other issues. After all, you must check the [!] items in the review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=NeiqZcgwuFa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071
--- Comment #14 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Some directories are not owned:
/usr/lib/%{name}/
%{_localstatedir}/lib/%{name}/
%{_localstatedir}/lib/%{name}/reports/
%{_datadir}/%{name}/
%{_datadir}/%{name}/cgi/
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
Note:
* No need to explicitly require rrdtool
* Requires perl(HTTP::Server::Simple) is false, it actually uses
perl(HTTP::Server::Simple::CGI) which has been added to Requires by
rpmbuild automatically.
* Requires perl(DBD::mysql) is needed in mysql.pm, just Requires
perl(DBI) is not enough
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
[!]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
Note: missed BuildRequires perl
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: 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]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
Perl:
[x]: Package contains the mandatory BuildRequires and Requires:.
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
Note: The Perl modules provided should be filtered.
The Requires perl(Monitorix) and perl(HTTPServer) should be
filtered.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[-]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HI8SSCs8ypa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|robinlee.s...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=EvRPIiJcNpa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #13 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Upstream has released a newer version: New SPEC URL: http://cicku.me/monitorix.spec New SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/monitorix-3.2.0-1.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=iG5S08SXxXa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #12 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #11) I've sponsored Christopher. Thanks. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8HUFWQJVCQa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #11 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com --- I've sponsored Christopher. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=53mv50bsjua=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071
Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rc040...@freenet.de
--- Comment #9 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de ---
MUSTFIX:
This package installs its perl modules under %{_libdir}/%{name}.
This is problematic twice:
- Noarch packages must not install files under %{_libdir}/%{name}
- /usr/bin/monitorix searches for its modules under /usr/lib/monitorix:
/usr/bin/monitorix:
...
use lib $Bin . /lib, /usr/lib/monitorix;
...
= Change your spec to install the perl-modules into /usr/lib/%{name}
instead of %{_libdir}/%{name}
Alternatively, modify the package to install the perl modules into
%{perl_vendorlib}/%{name}.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=db2FaHHjH4a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #10 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #9) Fixed by changing to /usr/lib New SRPM URL: http://cicku.me/monitorix-3.1.0-4.fc20.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=T2jQqNZew5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #8 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Koji success: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5316665 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qlaOA4zdfra=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 --- Comment #7 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #6) Please Require: logrotate, so we can ensure that /etc/logrotate.d will exist before monitorix tries to drop its file in there. Fixed...(OhDamn...) Even though upstream sets 777 on /var/share/monitorix/imgs/ in order to support multiple web servers, it's not acceptable for Fedora to ship a directory wide open like that (particularly one that's web-accessible). The easiest option is to just set Requires: httpd and give apache write permissions on the directory. It's a nice goal to support multiple web servers with our web apps, but that's going to require broader changes in Fedora than what we have available today. In this case it's best to choose secure by default. Monitorix enables its own built-in HTTP server by default, so upstream thought that it's better to rely on it instead obligating to the user to install a third party web server like Apache. Upstream recommended me that setting /var/share/monitorix/imgs/ as 755 and give the user 'nobody' the write permissions. So is it well enough? For Perl, please note that RPM is going to automatically add most of your dependencies already. To verify this, run rpm -qp --requires on your binary RPM. You'll see that RPM has already detected and added many of the requirements, and in fact, when you manually specify them in the .spec file, RPM is adding the requirement twice. For example: perl(MIME::Lite) perl(MIME::Lite) or perl-libwww-perl perl(LWP::UserAgent) Both of those LWP lines are equivalent. It's much better to let RPM just automatically determine the dependencies, so I recommend going through the --provides list and removing any of these doubly-listed dependencies. For the LWP example above, you can simply remove your Requires: perl-libwww-perl line. You can also remove the explicit requirement on rrdtool-perl, because RPM is automatically adding a dependency on perl(RRDs). These two Removed. On a similar note, RPM is erroneously concluding that your package provides a lot of Perl modules. (Run rpm -qp --provides on your binary RPM.) You'll need to filter those out. Add the following (I like to put these sort of definitions directly above %description): # We don't actually provide Perl modules for other packages to use. %global __provides_exclude perl\\( I just added it but this time yum said: Error: Package: monitorix-3.1.0-3.fc20.noarch (/monitorix-3.1.0-3.fc20.noarch) Requires: perl(Monitorix) Error: Package: monitorix-3.1.0-3.fc20.noarch (/monitorix-3.1.0-3.fc20.noarch) Requires: perl(HTTPServer) So what should I do? You'll need to remove the #!/usr/bin/env shebangs and use #!/usr/bin/perl instead. sed -i 's|/usr/bin/env perl|/usr/bin/perl|g' monitorix sed -i 's|/usr/bin/env perl|/usr/bin/perl|g' monitorix.cgi Added in %prep. I'm surprised that the .pm files have shebangs at all, and I would ask upstream if the .pm files' shebangs could be removed altogether. Ideally you should not see /usr/bin/env in the --requires at all. Upstream said it's a typo and will be removed in the next release.I've added a sed line in %prep. I'm not sure perl-MailTools is really a requirement, because I could find no reference to the Mail:: modules in the code. I recommend checking with upstream about whether that dependency could be dropped. Upstream said that this may be helpful on some CentOS systems, so I just removed it. Fixed. New place: SPEC: http://cicku.me/monitorix.spec SRPM: http://cicku.me/monitorix-3.1.0-3.fc20.noarch.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ryQCtwFTRea=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|New Review Request: |Review Request: monitorix - |monitorix - A free, open|A free, open source, |source, lightweight system |lightweight system |monitoring tool |monitoring tool -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qMdpDNGreIa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 947071] Review Request: monitorix - A free, open source, lightweight system monitoring tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=947071 Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktdre...@ktdreyer.com --- Comment #6 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com --- Hi Christopher, (This is just a nitpick: please offer links that provide direct downloads, so that wget, or the fedora-review tool, can properly process them.) On to the comments! Please Require: logrotate, so we can ensure that /etc/logrotate.d will exist before monitorix tries to drop its file in there. Even though upstream sets 777 on /var/share/monitorix/imgs/ in order to support multiple web servers, it's not acceptable for Fedora to ship a directory wide open like that (particularly one that's web-accessible). The easiest option is to just set Requires: httpd and give apache write permissions on the directory. It's a nice goal to support multiple web servers with our web apps, but that's going to require broader changes in Fedora than what we have available today. In this case it's best to choose secure by default. For Perl, please note that RPM is going to automatically add most of your dependencies already. To verify this, run rpm -qp --requires on your binary RPM. You'll see that RPM has already detected and added many of the requirements, and in fact, when you manually specify them in the .spec file, RPM is adding the requirement twice. For example: perl(MIME::Lite) perl(MIME::Lite) or perl-libwww-perl perl(LWP::UserAgent) Both of those LWP lines are equivalent. It's much better to let RPM just automatically determine the dependencies, so I recommend going through the --provides list and removing any of these doubly-listed dependencies. For the LWP example above, you can simply remove your Requires: perl-libwww-perl line. You can also remove the explicit requirement on rrdtool-perl, because RPM is automatically adding a dependency on perl(RRDs). On a similar note, RPM is erroneously concluding that your package provides a lot of Perl modules. (Run rpm -qp --provides on your binary RPM.) You'll need to filter those out. Add the following (I like to put these sort of definitions directly above %description): # We don't actually provide Perl modules for other packages to use. %global __provides_exclude perl\\( You'll need to remove the #!/usr/bin/env shebangs and use #!/usr/bin/perl instead. sed -i 's|/usr/bin/env perl|/usr/bin/perl|g' monitorix sed -i 's|/usr/bin/env perl|/usr/bin/perl|g' monitorix.cgi I'm surprised that the .pm files have shebangs at all, and I would ask upstream if the .pm files' shebangs could be removed altogether. Ideally you should not see /usr/bin/env in the --requires at all. I'm not sure perl-MailTools is really a requirement, because I could find no reference to the Mail:: modules in the code. I recommend checking with upstream about whether that dependency could be dropped. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DhdTdZaYHaa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
