Bug 512608

Summary: Review Request: mozilla-noscript - Javascript whitelist extension for Mozilla Firefox
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Andreas Thienemann <andreas>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: fedora-package-review, nb, notting, tomspur
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-01-15 12:25:51 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Andreas Thienemann 2009-07-19 19:43:53 UTC 
Spec URL: http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/mozilla-noscript/mozilla-noscript.spec
SRPM URL: http://home.bawue.de/~ixs/mozilla-noscript/mozilla-noscript-1.9.6-1.fc11.src.rpm
Description: 
The NoScript Firefox extension provides extra protection for Firefox.
It allows JavaScript, Java, Flash and other plugins to be 
executed only by trusted web sites of your choice (e.g. your online 
bank) and additionally provides Anti-XSS protection.

As usual, rpmline is a bit unhappy:
mozilla-noscript.x86_64: E: no-binary
mozilla-noscript.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
mozilla-noscript.x86_64: W: uncompressed-zip /usr/lib64/mozilla/extensions/{ec8030f7-c20a-464f-9b0e-13a3a9e97384}/{73a6fe31-595d-460b-a920-fcc0f8843232}/chrome/noscript.jar
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.

These should all be okay.
Comment 1 Thomas Spura 2009-10-21 00:48:23 UTC 
(In reply to comment #0)
> 
> These should all be okay.  

Hmm, no ;)

Just a few comments for now:

- Could you explain in the spec what your patch does?
- %global better than %define, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define

- rpmlint:
  no-binary error, because there is no binary and your package is *not* noarch.
  Does it work to make it noarch and install anything into %{_datadir}/mozilla/extensions/ ??

  only-non-binary-in-usr-lib warning would be gone with that, too.

I don't have the uncompressed-zip warning here (also 64-bit).
Comment 2 Nick Bebout 2009-10-23 02:52:09 UTC 
Hi Andreas,

I'd be happy to review this extension also (I did the mozilla-adblockplus), but I was wondering about the %{_datadir}/mozilla/extensions.  I've heard some discussion that that might be a better way to package it since it should be a noarch package.  What are your thoughts on this?
Comment 3 Thomas Spura 2009-11-14 18:20:12 UTC 
Ping, Andreas, any update?
Comment 4 Nick Bebout 2010-01-12 17:48:59 UTC 
Ping Andreas?
Comment 5 Thomas Spura 2010-01-15 12:25:51 UTC 
No progress since months -> closing

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 555751 ***