[Bug 196591] Review Request: bitlbee

[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 report.

Summary: Review Request: bitlbee


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196591





------- Additional Comments From redhat-bugzilla at linuxnetz.de  2006-09-01 08:41 EST -------
I'll review your x86_64 patch and add when there's a reference to a upstream 
bug report having the patch also applied (and maybe reviewed by upstream).

Regarding openssl vs. gnutls please read the comments above. I'm not interested 
in gnutls but to make Michael happy, I'm using it - for the same non-technical 
reason you provide, too.

Using condrestart for xinetd is accepted and will be added. I'm only binding to 
127.0.0.1 and the package itself works for me about a year as you can see from 
my changelog ;-)

This also should answer the question regarding "daemon"; yes, bitlbee can write 
to /var/lib/bitlbee, because it's set in the xinetd file. You're simply doing 
exactly the same, but using the user "nobody" for. But it would be interesting 
to know whether "daemon" or "nobody" is better...

I think, I'll push a new package when you've the testing completed and I got 
more input.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.