[Bug 240008] Review Request: ruby-shadow - ruby bindings for shadow password access

[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: ruby-shadow - ruby bindings for shadow password access


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=240008


mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp




------- Additional Comments From mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp  2007-05-14 10:40 EST -------
As I maintain several ruby modules, I make a quick comment.

* Are you sure that this is _truly_ licensed under
  public domain?
  (Well, actually many packages created by Japanese developer
   have no license documents or have some original license texts
   and each time I want to package into rpm style, I have to
   ask the developer and someone else about the license......)

* I strongly think that BuildRequires should also have
  "BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = 1.8"
  because you can rebuild this under ruby 1.9 (when ruby 1.9 rpm
  is out) but it is wrong because the rebuilt rpm should require
  ruby 1.9, not 1.8

* Fedora's default encoding is UTF-8 and please change the 
  encoding of README.euc to UTF-8 (and rename it).

* Compiler flags are wrong (do not honor fedora specific).
---------------------------------------------------------------
+ make
gcc -I. -I. -I/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux -I. -DHAVE_GETSPENT -DHAVE_SGETSPENT
-DHAVE_FGETSPENT -DHAVE_SETSPENT -DHAVE_ENDSPENT -DHAVE_LCKPWDF -DHAVE_ULCKPWDF
 -fPIC   -c shadow.c
gcc -shared  -L"/usr/lib" -o shadow.so shadow.o  -lruby  -lpthread -ldl -lcrypt
-lm   -lc
+ exit 0
---------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
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.