Spec URL: http://www.yortnoswad.org/packages/review/rubygem-uplift-bind-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://www.yortnoswad.org/packages/review/rubygem-uplift-bind-plugin-0.8.5-2.fc18.src.rpm Description: Provides a Bind DNS service based plugin Fedora Account System Username: tdawson Rpmlint Output: [me@rawhide]$ rpmlint rubygem-uplift-bind-plugin.spec rubygem-uplift-bind-plugin-0.8.5-2.fc18.src.rpm 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Hi, for some reason, there is a problem with the ruby subpackage : $ rpm --eval %ruby_sitelibdir /usr/local/share/ruby/site_ruby $ rpm -qpl ruby-uplift-bind-plugin-0.8.5-2.fc17.noarch.rpm /usr/local/share/ruby/site_ruby/uplift-bind-plugin /usr/local/share/ruby/site_ruby/uplift-bind-plugin.rb and that's forbidden to place a file in /usr/local/ from a rpm.
Hmm ... then I'm going to have a couple other packages with the same problem. The problem is that I replaced the variable %{ruby_sitelib} with %{ruby_sitelibdir} So the old way ruby_sitelib was determined with ruby -rrbconfig -e "puts Config::CONFIG['sitelibdir']" On RHEL6 you get /usr/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8 On Fedora 17 and 18 you get /usr/local/share/ruby/site_ruby I don't mind moving it to where it really needs to be. But I don't understand why the stock ruby variables are putting files in a place that is forbidden.
Aha ... I just found where it talks about this in the documentation. "Previously, %{ruby_sitelibdir} and %{ruby_sitearchdir} were used. However, as they are meant only for local installations, please use %{ruby_vendorlibdir} and %{ruby_vendorarchdir} instead." I will update the spec and rpm with %{ruby_vendorlibdir} and repost them.
Fixed: I have changed %{ruby_sitelibdir} to be %{ruby_vendorlibdir} which cleaned up having files in /usr/local/ I have also added LICENSE to the %DOC. Spec URL: http://www.yortnoswad.org/packages/review/rubygem-uplift-bind-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://www.yortnoswad.org/packages/review/rubygem-uplift-bind-plugin-0.8.5-3.fc18.src.rpm
Nitpicking a little, but i think BuildRequires could be simplied ( ruby-devel pull ruby, rubygems-devel pull rubygems ) Why does it require selinux policy and policycoreutils-python ? ( nothing in the current code seems to need it ). And shouldn't it requires rubygem(dnsruby) ? ( instead of bind + bind-utils, since the bind server seems to be able to be hosted remotely, since this use regular dns update )
ruby and ruby-devel, and rubygems and rubygems-devel. I just like to be complete. But to be honest, I'm not sure it needs the ruby and ruby-devel. Those were required to get the original ruby_sitelib directory. I'll see how it builds if I take those off. selinux-policy-targeted and policycoreutils-python ... good eye there. This spec file originally had some selinux stuff in the %post section, which was taken out. I'll take those out. As far as using rubygem(dnsruby) versus bind and bind-utils, I don't know. I didn't write the code and I don't know what calls they are using.
This package has been renamed rubygem-openshift-origin-dns-bind. Here is the new review request for it. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844817 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 844817 ***