This service will be undergoing maintenance at 00:00 UTC, 2016-08-01. It is expected to last about 1 hours
Bug 436741 - Review Request: ltsp - Linux Terminal Server Project
Review Request: ltsp - Linux Terminal Server Project
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review (Show other bugs)
rawhide
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Kevin Fenzi
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks: K12LTSP
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2008-03-10 02:03 EDT by Warren Togami
Modified: 2008-03-10 22:22 EDT (History)
5 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2008-03-10 22:22:30 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
kevin: fedora‑review+
wtogami: fedora‑cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Warren Togami 2008-03-10 02:03:40 EDT
Spec URL: http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/ltsp.spec
SRPM URL: http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/ltsp-5.1.0-0.1.20080310.fc8.src.rpm
Description: Linux Terminal Server Project 5 Server and Client
Comment 1 Matt Domsch 2008-03-10 15:52:49 EDT
Summary should not include '5'.
License should be: GPLv2 and GPLv2+
Group: specified in both top-level and packages.  Necessary?

rpmlint:
ltsp.src:183: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/syslinux/pxelinux.0
ltsp.src:184: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/syslinux/pxelinux.0
ltsp-client.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/lts.conf
ltsp-client.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/rwtab.d/k12linux.rwtab
ltsp-client.x86_64: E: zero-length /var/lib/random-seed
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: dir-or-file-in-opt /opt/ltsp
ltsp-server.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/sysconfig/k12_dist
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/ltsp/chkconfig.d/nbdrootd
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/ltsp/chkconfig.d/ldminfod
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: zero-length
/usr/share/ltsp/plugins/ltsp-build-client/Gentoo/020-rootpath
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/ltsp/plugins/ltsp-build-client/Fedora/010-chroot-creator 0644
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-postin /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-preun /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: incoherent-subsys /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name ltsp-dhcpd
ltsp-vmclient.x86_64: W: no-documentation

naming: ok
spec name matches: ok
meets guidelines: ok
license: ok
license field: needs fixing as noted above
license included: yes in server, but not in client or vmclient subpackages.
english: ok
legible: ok
sources: ok
builds: ok on x86_64 and i386 (the only ones I tested)
exclusivearch: no blocker bug filed that I know of
buildrequires: ok
locales: not used, ok
no shared libs, so no ldconfig.  OK
not relocatable: ok
directory ownership OK
defattr: missing for vmclient subpackage
no duplicate files: ok
clean: ok
code not content: ok
no large docs: ok
no headers: ok
no static libs: ok
no pkgconfig files: ok
no libs: ok
no devel pkg: ok
no libtool archives: ok
no GUI apps: ok
dir ownership: looks OK
%install rm -rf: ok
filenames UTF-8: ok

license included: ok
translated descriptions: no, but ok
builds in mock: ok on i386 and x86_64
compiles on i386 and x86_64
should test: not done
no scriptlets: ok
no subpackages need to include main package: ok
no pkgconfig files: ok
no file deps: ok


follows packaging guidelines best as I can tell.
Comment 2 Warren Togami 2008-03-10 16:28:44 EDT
ltsp.src:183: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/syslinux/pxelinux.0
ltsp.src:184: E: hardcoded-library-path in /usr/lib/syslinux/pxelinux.0
Necessary because you want the 32bit version.

ltsp-client.x86_64: E: zero-length /etc/lts.conf
Necessary because we need a blank file to be a mount point for bind mounts on
the client.

ltsp-client.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/rwtab.d/k12linux.rwtab
Necessary because we want this to be dropped into the client chroot but it
should be blown away during package upgrade.

ltsp-client.x86_64: E: zero-length /var/lib/random-seed
Another bind mount target.

ltsp-server.x86_64: E: dir-or-file-in-opt /opt/ltsp
Upstream standard, we are not changing this without their agreement.

ltsp-server.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/sysconfig/k12_dist
This is changing before F9.

ltsp-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/ltsp/chkconfig.d/nbdrootd
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/ltsp/chkconfig.d/ldminfod
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: zero-length
/usr/share/ltsp/plugins/ltsp-build-client/Gentoo/020-rootpath
Meant to be blank.

ltsp-server.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/ltsp/plugins/ltsp-build-client/Fedora/010-chroot-creator 0644
It is meant to be sourced and not executed directly.

ltsp-server.x86_64: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-postin /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-preun /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: E: incoherent-subsys /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: W: service-default-enabled /etc/init.d/ltsp-dhcpd
ltsp-server.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name ltsp-dhcpd
These might be legitimate, looking into this.
Comment 3 Warren Togami 2008-03-10 16:52:31 EDT
> exclusivearch: no blocker bug filed that I know of
Eh?  Is this really needed?

Comment 4 Warren Togami 2008-03-10 17:32:40 EDT
> Group: specified in both top-level and packages.  Necessary?

rpmbuild fails without it in both.  It sucks. =(
Comment 5 Warren Togami 2008-03-10 18:02:55 EDT
http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/ltsp.spec.old
http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/ltsp.spec
http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/ltsp.spec.patch
Old spec, new spec, and diff between them.

http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/ltsp-5.1.0-0.2.20080310.fc8.src.rpm

I think I fixed everything that should be fixed except:
ltsp-server.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name ltsp-dhcpd
I am not sure what is triggering this warning.
Comment 6 Kevin Fenzi 2008-03-10 19:42:51 EDT
ok, let me do a final check here... taking for review. 
Comment 7 Kevin Fenzi 2008-03-10 20:20:18 EDT
Aside from a small change to fix ppc builds, I don't see any further issues here. 

This package is APPROVED. 

Might be good to ping the sparc and ppc folks to get this up to speed on those
arches as far as net booting clients, etc. 
Comment 8 Warren Togami 2008-03-10 22:03:37 EDT
cvs done and building now

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.