Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: amavisd-milter - Sendmail milter for amavisd-new with support for the AM.PDP protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634760
Summary: Review Request: amavisd-milter - Sendmail milter for amavisd-new with support for the AM.PDP protocol Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: phalenor@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://www.bx.psu.edu/~phalenor/rpm/amavisd-milter/amavisd-milter.spec SRPM URL: http://www.bx.psu.edu/~phalenor/rpm/amavisd-milter/amavisd-milter-1.5.0-2.sr... Description: Taken from the project website: "amavisd-milter is a sendmail milter (mail filter) for amavisd-new 2.4.3 or and sendmail 8.13 and above (limited support for sendmail 8.12 is provided) which use the new AM.PDP protocol.
Instead of older amavis-milter helper program, full amavisd-new functionality is available, including adding spam and virus information header fields, modifying Subject, adding address extensions and removing certain recipients from delivery while delivering the same message to the rest."
The currently packaged amavisd-new-milter contains a milter that does not support the AM.PDP protocol, preventing it from making full use of the amavisd-new functionality.
This is my first package, and will need a sponsor.
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=634760
Andy Cobaugh phalenor@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
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=634760
Sergio Belkin sebelk@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |sebelk@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Sergio Belkin sebelk@gmail.com 2011-02-18 13:13:24 EST --- Hi,
I am not still member of packaging group, however I hope that you find my casual review useful:
1. You use localstatedir /var/amavis
Why? AFAIK amavisd-new in fedora doesn't use that directory:
repoquery -l amavisd-new | grep "var/amavis" |wc -l 0
2. BuildRoot: and clean section are not needed anymore.
3. Beware you have some issue about initscript file, run rpmlint, you should not enable a service by default, take a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SysVInitScript. Also you will find interesting http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/var-run-tmpfs.
4. Also this is no an error, but be aware that you're not using dist tag: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DistTag
Hope that helps.
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=634760
--- Comment #2 from Andy Cobaugh phalenor@gmail.com 2011-03-03 14:57:26 EST --- Thanks for the comments. RHEL uses /var/amavis, so I've put in a test for rhel vs fedora for that.
Regarding builroot and the clean section, what's the recommended way to handle that when building for RHEL? Are those two going away entirely, or just superfluous in fedora?
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=634760
--- Comment #3 from Ken Dreyer ktdreyer@ktdreyer.com 2012-02-16 09:10:45 EST --- (In reply to comment #2)
Thanks for the comments. RHEL uses /var/amavis, so I've put in a test for rhel vs fedora for that.
Can you post a link to your updated .spec and .srpm?
Regarding builroot and the clean section, what's the recommended way to handle that when building for RHEL? Are those two going away entirely, or just superfluous in fedora?
You can just leave these in; they don't hurt anything on Fedora. Once RHEL 5 goes EOL you can remove them.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org