[Bug 551857] Review Request: fwsnort - Translates Snort rules into equivalent iptables rules

[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=551857

Colin Coe <colin.coe at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |colin.coe at gmail.com

--- Comment #1 from Colin Coe <colin.coe at gmail.com> 2010-02-01 21:45:35 EST ---
MUST
----
rpmlint output - MISSING

Package name - OKAY

Spec file matches base package - OKAY

# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .

License must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing
Guidelines - OK

License in spec must match actual license - BAD
Spec file states license is GPLv2 but fwsnort.8 states GPL (no version)

License file include in %doc - BAD
License file not included in RPM

Spec file written in American English - OK

Spec file legible - OK

Tar ball matches upstream - OK

Package successfully builds binary RPMs - OK (tested on RHEL5)

All build dependencies listed in BuildRequires - N/A

Spec file MUST handle locales properly - N/A

Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files must call ldconfig
in %post and %postun - N/A

Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries - N/A

Pakcage relocatable - N/A

Package must own all directories that it creates - OK

No duplicate files - OK

Permissions on files must be set correctly - OK

Each package must have %clean which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} - OK

Macro use must be consistant - OK

Package must contain code or permissable content - OK

Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage - OK

Doc files must not affect runtime - N/A

Header files must be in devel package - N/A

Static Libaries must be in statioc package

Packahes containing pkgconfig files must 'Requirs: pkgconfig' - N/A

If package contains library files with a suffix then library files that end in
.so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package - N/A

Devel package to be versioned against base - N/A

Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives - N/A

Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file - N/A

Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages - OK

At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} - OK

All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8 - OK



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 - N/A

The description and summary sections in the package spec file should contain
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available - N/A

The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock - OK (tested against
RHEL5)

The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures - OK

The reviewer should test that the package functions as described - not running
snort: not done.

If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane - N/A

Subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully
versioned dependency - N/A

The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files depends on their usecase, and this is
usually for development purposes, so should be placed in a -devel pkg - N/A

If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or
/usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the
file itself - N/A

Your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts. If it doesn't, work
with upstream to add them where they make sense - OK


RESULTS
-------
Please provide rpmlint output

Please review the license

Please include LICENSE in the %doc section.  Please also consider moving
/etc/fwsnort/snort_rules/VERSION to %doc section

Please consider including the following files in the %doc section:
VERSION
README
CREDITS
TODO

-- 
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.