[Bug 487737] Review Request: slock - Simple X display locker

[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=487737


Alexey Torkhov <atorkhov at gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




--- Comment #11 from Alexey Torkhov <atorkhov at gmail.com>  2009-03-23 16:13:41 EDT ---
+ rpmlint output:
slock.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/slock root 04755
slock.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/slock 04755
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.

Setuid binary is intended. Otherwise it can't check user password. It drops
privileges soon after start.

+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
  %{name}.spec.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
  Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
+ File, containing the text of the licenses for the package is included in
  %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as
  provided in the spec URL.
df342ad129cf2c3b8eb8da9d9d0ab845  slock-0.9.tar.gz
df342ad129cf2c3b8eb8da9d9d0ab845  slock-0.9.tar.gz

+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
  one primary architecture (x86_64).
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
+ No need to deal with locales.
+ Does not contain shared libraries.
+ The package does not designed to be relocatable.
+ A package owns all directories that it creates.
+ A package does list a file more than once in the spec %files listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
+ Does not contain large documentation files.
+ Includes only doc files in %doc.
+ No headers.
+ No static libraries.
+ The package does not contain pkgconfig(.pc) files.
+ The package does not contain library files with a suffix (e.g.
  libfoo.so.1.1).
+ No devel packages.
+ The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
+ Does not need %{name}.desktop file.

This is not really GUI application and does not need desktop file. But please
add comment about this in spec before import.

+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
  packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
+ All filenames in the package are valid UTF-8.
+ The package builds in mock.
+ The package functions as described.

This package is APPROVED.

-- 
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.