[Bug 566962] Review Request: polipo - Lightweight Caching Web Proxy

[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=566962

Mark Chappell <tremble at tremble.org.uk> changed:

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

--- Comment #21 from Mark Chappell <tremble at tremble.org.uk> 2010-03-18 15:45:19 EDT ---

> /var/log/polipo is a logfile, so I follow
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Logfiles to add %ghost %config
> to the logfile, I'm not suse if it's the right pattern to package a logfile.

That's reasonable and I'm happy with that.  Note: that's only a draft.

There's been some discussion on IRC, and it basically comes down to should a
package 'own' it's logs.  FPC has yet to make a ruling to at this stage you
comply with the guidelines.  I personally prefer the RPM owning like this. 

> > polipo.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/polipo 0750
> > 
> > I would normally expect that to be 0700 or owned by root
> > 
> Refer to the squid rpm, /var/cache/polipo should be owned by polipo and have a
> non-standard-dir-perm. 

Various packages have done various different things, that was not something I
considered a blocker, simply something worth considering.  I'm happy with your
logic.

MD5 Sums now match.

In future, even for the small updates, please up the release number when you up
load.

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.