[Bug 249365] Review Request: alpine - UW Alpine mail user agent

[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: alpine - UW Alpine mail user agent


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249365


jima at beer.tclug.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jima at beer.tclug.org




------- Additional Comments From jima at beer.tclug.org  2007-07-24 17:54 EST -------
 Once I got that out, I sat down to actually look over the differences between
our specs.

 My first and foremost concern is that your tarball still contains a file that a
number of Fedora developers have agreed is of fairly serious concern, namely,
pico/cc5.sol, due to this:

#       THIS IS UNPUBLISHED PROPRIETARY SOURCE CODE OF AT&T
#       The copyright notice above does not evidence any
#       actual or intended publication of such source code.

 Steve Hubert from upstream said it'd be removed, but until it is, it's legally
dicey for us to even distribute it in the SRPM.  I've re-rolled my tarball to
reflect that.

 Beyond that, I have the following BRs you don't:

aspell-devel inews openldap-devel passwd sendmail

 My aspell-devel BR may in fact be the erroneous way to go about it; I was
merely going with the default, possibly autopilot, method to satisfy the
configure script's search for a spellchecker.  Your
--with-spellcheck-prog=aspell may well take care of that better than my
solution.  (Err, yeah, I think my BR didn't even help anything.  So you win
there. :-)
 The inews BR was simply to fulfill another "not found" in the configure script.
 Ditto on passwd and sendmail.  Your BR on /usr/sbin/sendmail will actually
probably cause exim to get pulled into the build chroot, due to it being the
shortest-named package providing that file.  I'm not sure if that actually
causes any problems.  Your Require on /usr/sbin/sendmail is another good thing I
didn't think of.
 I do believe, however, that my openldap-devel BR does enable LDAP functionality
in Alpine.  You may want to add that.

 I included /etc/pine.conf and /etc/pine.conf.fixed in my package.  The former
was actually generated from `alpine -conf` in the %install section, the latter
is just a placeholder with some explanatory text.

 I think I caught some things you didn't, but you definitely caught some I
flat-out screwed up on.  Yay for open source collaboration. :-)
 I'm throwing your package into mock to see what comes out.  Oh, done already. 
Nice.  Here we go:

W: alpine no-version-in-last-changelog
W: alpine-debuginfo no-version-in-last-changelog

 See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-b7d622f4bb245300199c6a33128acce5fb453213
-- you need to put the EVR of the package (without the dist tag -- in this case,
0.999-2) somewhere in the changelog entry, in one of the three formats.

W: alpine-debuginfo spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/alpine-0.999/alpine/arg.c
W: alpine-debuginfo spurious-executable-perm /usr/src/debug/alpine-0.999/pico/main.c

 Oh yeah, I forgot about them.  I had this in my %prep:

chmod -x alpine/arg.c pico/main.c

 Upstream said they'd fix that, IIRC.

 There was also (at some point) some oddness about mlock being included, but
I'll need to rebuild my package to verify that.
 Gotta go for now, but nice job with this package! :-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.