[Bug 226192] Merge Review: net-snmp

[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=226192





--- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2010-01-08 19:56:16 EDT ---
Indeed the package does look better.  Still quite a number of rpmlint
complaints, most of which can be ignored, but I'll post the full list:

  net-snmp.x86_64: W: dangerous-command-in-%post mv
Agreed that this may be OK, but what was the last release that put data in
/var/net-snmp?  If it was more than a few releases ago, there's no point in
keeping this bit at all.  At the least, some indication of which releases
require it is in order.

Similarly, "allow compilation on old Fedoras" can go if "old Fedoras" is older
than F10.  At the very least, some statement of "how old" would be good to
have.

  net-snmp-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
   /usr/src/debug/net-snmp-5.5/agent/helpers/table_row.c
If you fixed it upstream, great; this isn't really that big of a deal anyway. 
Honestly it would be nice if the debuginfo generation took care of that kind of
thing anyway.

  net-snmp-libs.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol
   /usr/lib64/libnetsnmpagent.so.20.0.0 netsnmp_register_null_context
Six of these in this library with different symbols.  I suppose if you want to
use this library you also have to link against some other library which
provides those symbols.  That's bad programming practice but not a review
blocker.

  net-snmp-libs.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency
   /usr/lib64/libnetsnmpagent.so.20.0.0 /usr/lib64/libcrypto.so.10  
Many of these in various different libraries.  All of these libraries are
linked against other libraries even though they call nothing in them.  This
probably isn't an issue as most of these libraries will be in memory anyway,
although there are a couple of libperl.so references that don't need to be
there.
In general these are OK; they're bad if the force unnecessary dependencies or
pull in unused libraries that won't generally already be in memory, and you can
get rid of them with "-Wl,--as-needed" on the link line.  Maybe that's what
"--enable-as-needed" on the configure line is for, but it doesn't seem to help.
 In any case I don't see anything which would block a review.

One minor nit is that I don't see the point of the "Building option" bit in
%description.  When you see that in the final package, it makes it seem that
use of tcp_wrappers is disabled when in fact it's enabled.  Such a comment is
appropriate for the spec file but not really useful in the binary package.

So really, this is very close.

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