Bug 446800

You'll need to remove the errant info "dir" in order for this to build.

You shouldn't include the same six documentation files in every subpackage.

That's all I see at a quick glance.

Thanks, updated.

Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd.spec
SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd-1.0-2.fc9.src.rpm

requested by Jens Petersen (#27995)

What's comment #3 about?

Anyway. . .

rpmlint on SRPM is clean.

rpmlint on RPMS:

ebhttpd.i386: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

ebnetd.i386: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.

ebnetd-common.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/lib/ebnetd ebnetd
A file in this package is owned by a non standard user. Standard users are:
root, bin, daemon, adm, lp, sync, shutdown, halt, mail, news, uucp, operator,
games, gopher, ftp, nobody.

ebnetd-common.i386: W: non-standard-gid /var/lib/ebnetd ebnetd
A file in this package is owned by a non standard group. Standard groups are:
root, bin, daemon, sys, adm, tty, disk, lp, mem, kmem, wheel, mail, news,
uucp, man, games, gopher, dip, ftp, lock, nobody, users.

ebnetd-common.i386: W: non-standard-uid /var/run/ebnetd ebnetd
A file in this package is owned by a non standard user. Standard users are:
root, bin, daemon, adm, lp, sync, shutdown, halt, mail, news, uucp, operator,
games, gopher, ftp, nobody.

ebnetd-common.i386: W: non-standard-gid /var/run/ebnetd ebnetd
A file in this package is owned by a non standard group. Standard groups are:
root, bin, daemon, sys, adm, tty, disk, lp, mem, kmem, wheel, mail, news,
uucp, man, games, gopher, dip, ftp, lock, nobody, users.

ndtpd.i386: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.



These are all fine, see above.

Otherwise, everything looks great, my only other concern after a full review is the Conflicts: for ebhttpd.  Will users expect this to be on port 80 by default, period, full stop, or would it be feasible to set it to use something else by default, or recommend that to users?  It'd be as simple as modifying the xinetd file.  My preference would be to leave it as is, drop the Conflicts:, but add a ebnetd-README.fedora indicating the port 80 issues and resolutions, so that if someone wants to use this on a machine with an existing httpd/tux/whatever, then they have that option and won't be stopped by the RPM.

Thanks for the review. I'd prefer adding a document how to change the port too. updated srpm and spec file is:

Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd.spec
SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd-1.0-3.fc9.src.rpm

Please avoid using fedora in the file name:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Packaging_Tricks#Avoiding_using_fedora_or_redhat

Thanks. updated.

Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd.spec
SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd-1.0-4.fc9.src.rpm

Perfect.  Thanks!

APPROVED.

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: ebnetd
Short Description: EBNET protocol server
Owners: tagoh
Branches: devel F-9 F-8
InitialCC:

cvs done

unable to build the package due to "FAILED: BuildError: package ebnetd not in list for tag dist-{f10,{f9,f8}-updates-candidate}.

there seems to be a delay. it's ok now.