[Bug 581181] Review Request: scalpel - Forensic tool for file carving from disk images

[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=581181

Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) <pahan at hubbitus.info> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+

--- Comment #3 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) <pahan at hubbitus.info> 2010-08-26 05:10:57 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> >[-] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
> >Source tarball contain two files prioque.h and prioque.c with other author than
> >scalpel and without licence mention. It require clarification.
> I believe author of all files is the same - just he made Ph. D. (congratz
> Golden G. Richard III ! :) . Have you found it by some automated tool?

Sorry, really author the same. So, then it no problem if no other license
mentioned.
And no, I found it manually - there very few files and check its is not so
hard.

> >[-] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
> >%attr specification is ambiguous in:
> >%attr(755,root,root) %{_bindir}/%{name} 
> I do not understand what you mean - this executable will be set with 755
> permissions ownership by root.
> How ambiguous is that?

Before that you already set up tis permissions on install:
install -m 755 %{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{name}

Just for the info constructions like:
install -d %{buildroot}%{_bindir}
install -m 755 %{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{name}

May be replaced by one line (with -D flag):
install -Dm 755 %{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{name}

> >2) If you do not plan maintain it for EPEL 4-5 (guess by presented builds) tag
> >BuildRoot is ambiguous.
> I do plan to maintain for EPEL as well
Ok, then all fine there.

> >3) I have not completely understand what you are doing wit config on sed. Can
> >you describe slightly?
> I have put description to comments
> In distribution configuration everything is commented out.
> Sed will enable most of the file extensions to be found.
Ok. I believe you test it.


Now only ask to remove ambiguous attribute specification, otherwise package
seams now fine.
Package 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.