[Bug 608447] Review Request: perl-Data-Serializer - Modules that serialize data structures
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=608447 Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr 2010-07-11 02:08:57 EDT --- Taking. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608447] Review Request: perl-Data-Serializer - Modules that serialize data structures
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=608447
Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr
2010-07-11 02:28:49 EDT ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2310626
[x] Rpmlint output:
perl-Data-Serializer.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/perl5/Data/Serializer.pm
perl-Data-Serializer.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/perl5/Data/Serializer/Cookbook.pm
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[-] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
31a8c3f5ab573a840b4314d327bc534a Data-Serializer-0.49.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[!] Permissions on files are set properly.
/usr/share/perl5/Data/Serializer/Cookbook.pm and
/usr/share/perl5/Data/Serializer.pm
are chmod 755.They should be chmod 644.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: rawhide.x86_64
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
All tests successful.
Files=28, Tests=2982, 7 wallclock secs ( 0.31 usr 0.03 sys + 6.05 cusr 0.94
csys = 7.33 CPU)
Result: PASS
APPROVED.
Ian, please change the file permissions on Data/Serializer.pm and
Data/Serializer/Cookbook.pm before check-in.
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 606379] Review Request: rubygem-oniguruma - Bindings for the oniguruma regular expression library
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=606379 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-07-11 02:28:53 EDT --- Thank you. Closing. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608419] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI - For using CGI::Application under FastCGI
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=608419 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||iarn...@gmail.com QAContact|extras...@fedoraproject.org |iarn...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608419] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI - For using CGI::Application under FastCGI
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=608419 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 03:22:21 EDT --- + source files match upstream. c8812ed3d04a4d4e9233a9550c3862d2 CGI-Application-FastCGI-0.02.tar.gz + package meets naming and versioning guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. + summary is OK. + description is OK. + dist tag is present. + build root is OK. + license field matches the actual license. GPL+ or Artistic + license is open source-compatible. + license text not included upstream. + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + package builds in mock http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2310649 + package installs properly. + rpmlint has no complaints: perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI.noarch: I: checking perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI.noarch: I: checking-url http://search.cpan.org/dist/CGI-Application-FastCGI/ (timeout 10 seconds) perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI.src: I: checking perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI.src: I: checking-url http://search.cpan.org/dist/CGI-Application-FastCGI/ (timeout 10 seconds) perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI.src: I: checking-url http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/N/NA/NAOYA/CGI-Application-FastCGI-0.02.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. - final provides and requires are sane: perl(CGI::Application::FastCGI) = 0.02 perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI = 0.02-1.fc14 = perl(base) perl(CGI) perl(FCGI) perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.1) perl(strict) + %check is present and all tests pass. t/CGI-Application-FastCGI.t .. ok All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=1, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.02 usr 0.00 sys + 0.04 cusr 0.01 csys = 0.07 CPU) Result: PASS + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no generically named files + code, not content. + documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. + %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. You need an explicit Requires: perl(CGI::Application) which isn't picked up automatically due to use base construct. But otherwise, it's fine. 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608447] Review Request: perl-Data-Serializer - Modules that serialize data structures
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=608447 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 03:30:17 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Data-Serializer Short Description: Modules that serialize data structures Owners: iarnell Branches: F-11 F-12 F-13 devel InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608447] Review Request: perl-Data-Serializer - Modules that serialize data structures
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=608447 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 03:36:29 EDT --- Oops. Ignore previous comment - should be F-12 F-13 branches only, of course. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Data-Serializer Short Description: Modules that serialize data structures Owners: iarnell Branches: F-12 F-13 InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 609352] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Unicode-Encoding - Unicode aware Catalyst
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=609352 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-07-11 05:13:22 EDT --- perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Unicode-Encoding-1.1-1.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Unicode-Encoding-1.1-1.fc12 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 609352] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Unicode-Encoding - Unicode aware Catalyst
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=609352 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-07-11 05:13:16 EDT --- perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Unicode-Encoding-1.1-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Catalyst-Plugin-Unicode-Encoding-1.1-1.fc13 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 580755] Review Request: yad - Display graphical dialogs from shell scripts or command line
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=580755 --- Comment #4 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2010-07-11 05:17:19 EDT --- Meanwhile 0.3.0 is out and the license question is answered, all files are GPLv3+ now. Please update your package so I can have a look over it. If I don't hear back within two weeks, I will close this review. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 568315] Review Request: xapply - Parallel Execution tool ala xargs/apply
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=568315 --- Comment #9 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no 2010-07-11 05:15:46 EDT --- ping? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608419] Review Request: perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI - For using CGI::Application under FastCGI
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=608419 Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr 2010-07-11 05:40:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) You need an explicit Requires: perl(CGI::Application) which isn't picked up automatically due to use base construct. But otherwise, it's fine. Done. APPROVED. Thanks, Ian. Requesting CVS. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-CGI-Application-FastCGI Short Description: For using CGI::Application under FastCGI Owners: eseyman Branches: F-13 F-12 InitialCC: perl-sig -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 532382] Review Request: fvkbd - Free Virtual Keyboard
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=532382 Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 05:44:08 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: fvkbd New Branches: EL-6 Owners: pbrobinson -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604501] Review Request: gtk-chtheme - Gtk+ 2.0 theme preview and selection made slick
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=604501 Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|terje...@phys.ntnu.no Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no 2010-07-11 05:48:57 EDT --- ok rpmlint ok named and versioned according to the Package Naming Guidelines ok spec file name matches base package name ok license : GPLv2+ tag correct and all files with license info ok COPYING packaged as %doc ok source matches upstream: dbea31f4092877e786fe040fae1374238fada94a gtk-chtheme-0.3.1.tar.bz2 dbea31f4092877e786fe040fae1374238fada94a gtk-chtheme-0.3.1.tar.bz2.1 ! builds in koji: something is wrong here, might be missing #include, please have a look. Ref: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2310790 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=2310792name=build.log ok no missing BuildRequires (builds in mock) ok no translations, so translation/locale guidelines don't apply ok no shared libraries, so no ldconfig calls neeed ok no duplicated system libraries ok package not relocatable ok directory ownership correct (doesn't own directories owned by another package, owns all package-specific directories) ok no duplicate files in %files ! permissions correct, defattr used correctly please drop %attr on man page, change to correct mode in %install. %attr is for special cases. ok macros ok no non-code content ok no large documentation files, so no -doc package needed ok no %doc files required at runtime ok no header files which would need to be in a -devel subpackage ok no static libraries, so no -static package needed ok no devel symlinks which would need to be in a -devel subpackage ok no -devel package, ok no .la files ok .desktop file ok desktop-file-validate is used in %install and the .desktop file passes validation ok all filenames are valid UTF-8 ok complies with the FHS ok proper changelog, tags, BuildRoot, BuildRequires, Summary, Description ok no macros in Summary and Description ok no non-UTF-8 characters ok all relevant documentation included as %doc ok RPM_OPT_FLAGS are used (%cmake macro) ok debuginfo package is valid ok no rpaths ok no configuration files, so %config guideline doesn't apply ok no init scripts, so init script guideline doesn't apply ok no timestamp-clobbering file commands ok _smp_mflags used ok not a web application, so web application guideline doesn't apply ok no conflicts Please have a look on items marked with ! . -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573448] Review request: TinyCDB
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=573448 Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo? |needinfo?(mad...@mymadcat.c ||om) -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library
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=456353 --- Comment #31 from John Haxby j...@thehaxbys.co.uk 2010-07-11 06:20:56 EDT --- I re-compiled the F13 jack-audio-connection-kit with freebob replaced by ffado but unfortunately it doesn't work with my Edirol FA-101. I have had this working with the old firewire stack and a previous version of ffado on F12. ffado-diag still reports that it wants the old version of the firewire stack, but I suspect that's more to do with ffado-diag than anything else. Do I need something more? Do you want any diagnostics from me? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library
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=456353 --- Comment #32 from Stefan Richter stefan-r-r...@s5r6.in-berlin.de 2010-07-11 06:47:41 EDT --- Re comment 31: John, please open a separate bug for this, or let us discuss this on ffado-user (requires subscription, http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=192582) or linux1394-user (open for posting without prior subscription, http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=2252). -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 566405] Review Request: nmbscan - A NMB/SMB network scanner
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=566405 --- Comment #10 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2010-07-11 06:50:16 EDT --- Nikolay, are you still interested in this package? If so, please address the small remaining issues so that we can finish the review. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library
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=456353 --- Comment #33 from John Haxby j...@thehaxbys.co.uk 2010-07-11 07:00:43 EDT --- The non-functional parts might be to do with libavc1394-devel not being installed (and not required, but ffado-diag moans about it). I'll take other problems to the ffado-user list and open bugs as needed. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573448] Review request: TinyCDB
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=573448 Adrien Bustany mad...@mymadcat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(mad...@mymadcat.c | |om) | --- Comment #12 from Adrien Bustany mad...@mymadcat.com 2010-07-11 07:47:32 EDT --- Chen, I'm affraid I won't have enough spare time to properly work on this package, feel free to take it if you want Regards Adrien -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 476056] Review Request: gnustep-back - The GNUstep backend library
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=476056 --- Comment #10 from Michel Alexandre Salim michael.silva...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 08:22:53 EDT --- Hi Jochen, Could you build gnustep-make for F-13 (and preferably also F-12) and push them to the testing repository? Since I'm a comaintainer, I can do that too, but it's better if the person who writes the update also pushes it out. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 612671] Review Request: nodm - A display manager automatically starting an X session
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=612671 Michel Alexandre Salim michael.silva...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||michael.silva...@gmail.com Flag||needinfo?(tom_atkin...@fsfe ||.org) --- Comment #1 from Michel Alexandre Salim michael.silva...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 08:41:49 EDT --- Hi Tom, Could you take a look at some of these and do the pre-review a couple of them? Provide the links to the bugs you pre-review and I'll then check your work, finish the review, and if everything is satisfactory, approve this request. I normally sponsor packagers if during the review process they show they understand the packaging guidelines, but since in this case the package is being taken over unchanged, I'm afraid I need another way of gauging this understanding :) Plus this helps take a stab at the review backlog. Cheers, -- Michel -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611476] Review Request: dhcp_probe - Tool for discover DHCP and BootP servers
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=611476 --- Comment #4 from Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 08:45:45 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Quick comments: - use version macro in source url done - add -p to the install of dhcp_probe.cf done thanks srpm url: http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/dhcp_probe/1.3.0-3/dhcp_probe-1.3.0-3.fc13.src.rpm spec url: http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/dhcp_probe/1.3.0-3/dhcp_probe.spec $ rpmlint -i dhcp_probe-1.3.0-3.fc13.src.rpm dhcp_probe.spec dhcp_probe.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dhcp - dhow, Dhaka, dhoti The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 610934] Review Request: go - The Google Go Programming Language
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=610934
--- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim michael.silva...@gmail.com
2010-07-11 09:08:34 EDT ---
Brandon,
When updating for the new release, please do the following:
- for the clone instruction, instead of -r release, please use -r
release.2010-07-01 . This makes sure that the instruction would fetch the
correct source even after subsequent releases
(aside: kind of curious how the release.2010-07-01 tag does *not* appear in the
output of 'hg tags' until after I pull in some changes newer than the tag)
- use hg archive instead of invoking tar yourself. That would strip out the .hg
metadata, and for those who track the Go upstream repo (as you, me as the
reviewer, and any future co-maintainers likely do), it would avoid having to
clone a new copy every time a new release come out because the working tree has
been used for compilation.
- if you're targeting only recent Fedora releases, consider using xz instead of
bzip2 for the archive compression.
hg archive -t tar ../go-20100701.tar
cd ..
xz -9e -k go-*.tar # -k only used so the .tar is kept for re-compressing
bzip2 --best -k go-*.tar
ls -l go*.tar*
$ ls -l go*.tar*
-rw-rw-r--. 1 michel michel 20541440 Jul 11 14:54 go-20100701.tar
-rw-rw-r--. 1 michel michel 4700747 Jul 11 14:54 go-20100701.tar.bz2
-rw-rw-r--. 1 michel michel 3762540 Jul 11 14:54 go-20100701.tar.xz
- Here's the Emacs packaging guideline. You'd want to byte-compile the *.el
files if possible, and only package the .elc files in the main Emacs
subpackage. The source *.el should be in a separate emacs-go-el subpackage.
- there seems to be a bug in the files section. Since 8* is generated on ix86,
and 6* on x86_64, you probably want
%ifarch %ix86
%{_bindir}/8*
%else
%{_bindir}/6*
%endif
... common filenames here ...
- you need to own %{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d
- for Fedora 12 and above, BuildRoot no longer needs to be defined. For Fedora
13 and above, %clean is also no longer needed.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
So depending on which distributions you want to target, you can remove those.
Keeping them is fine too.
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226142] Merge Review: mikmod
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=226142 Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jindrich Novy jn...@redhat.com 2010-07-11 10:01:41 EDT --- Kevin, please could you process the request as noted in comment #3? The reasons are same as in bug 345261. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 609688] Review Request: secstate - Security requirements reporting and configuration
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=609688 Jan F. Chadima jchad...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 609688] Review Request: secstate - Security requirements reporting and configuration
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=609688 --- Comment #11 from Jan F. Chadima jchad...@redhat.com 2010-07-11 10:16:45 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) Jan, are you a sponsor and do you want to take this review request and sponsor Marshall? You did not set the fedora-review flag to ?, Thx, I've forgotten -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 612384] Review Request: teal - Verification utility and connection library
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=612384 --- Comment #3 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 10:24:11 EDT --- - Added patch for versioned shared library inclusion. - Moved shared libraries to _libdir. - Moved examples to -devel subpackage. - Added ldconfig post, postun invocation. SPEC: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/teal.spec SRPM: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/teal-1_40b-2.fc14.src.rpm -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library
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=456353 --- Comment #34 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 10:56:59 EDT --- John, I'll add the ENABLE_ALL flag on the next revision of the package. This will enable all devices, including those supported by libavc1394. Thanks for the heads up. Meanwhile I am still waiting for a response from ffado developers about using the system versions of dbus and libconfig libraries, instead of the bundled ones. Stay tuned. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 607584] Review Request: wordgroupz - A vocabulary building application
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=607584 Ratnadeep Debnath rtn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(rtn...@gmail.com) | --- Comment #3 from Ratnadeep Debnath rtn...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 11:06:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) ping? pong I was working on some new code of wordGroupz. Will update the rpms. Thanks. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611476] Review Request: dhcp_probe - Tool for discover DHCP and BootP servers
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=611476 --- Comment #5 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no 2010-07-11 11:08:21 EDT --- Please modify file listing to drop INSTALL and INSTALL.dhcp_probe and add AUTHORS, NEWS and TODO. Does it make sense to ship a init script? koji is happy: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2311300 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608470] Review Request: perl-Test-Script-Run - Test scripts with Perl
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=608470
--- Comment #4 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2010-07-11 11:45:09
EDT ---
%{perl_vendorlib}/Test/Script/Run.pm
With this line, you only own then .pm file.
According to Guidelines A package must own all directories that it creates
So you must own test and script folder.
Simple way:
%{perl_vendorlib}/Test
Very descriptive way:
%dir %{perl_vendorlib}/Test
%dir %{perl_vendorlib}/Test/Script
%{perl_vendorlib}/Test/Script/Run.pm
Everything else seems ok.
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608470] Review Request: perl-Test-Script-Run - Test scripts with Perl
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=608470 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com Flag||fedora-review? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 597409] Review Request: php-channel-deepend - Survive The Deep End PEAR Channel
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=597409 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@famillecollet.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com Flag||fedora-review? -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 238705] Review Request: avr-gcc - Cross Compiling GNU GCC targeted at avr
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=238705 Thibault North thibault.no...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||thibault.no...@gmail.com Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Thibault North thibault.no...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 11:59:19 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: avr-gcc New Branches: EL-6 Owners: tnorth trondd We would like to have FEL-related packages available for EL-6. Thanks ! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 597409] Review Request: php-channel-deepend - Survive The Deep End PEAR Channel
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=597409
Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2010-07-11 12:00:27
EDT ---
REVIEW
* no source files (channel.xml match latest upstream)
* package meets naming
* package must meet packaging guidelines
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is correct.
* license field matches the actual license (of the packages provided by the
channel).
* license is open source-compatible (BSD).
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (F-13).
* package installs properly
* channel (un)registered properly
* rpmlint (warnings are ok) :
$ rpmlint -v php-channel-deepend.spec
/home/extras/SRPMS/php-channel-deepend-1.3-1.fc13.src.rpm
/home/extras/RPMS/noarch/php-channel-deepend-1.3-1.fc13.noarch.rpm
php-channel-deepend.spec: I: checking-url
http://pear.survivethedeepend.com/channel.xml (timeout 10 seconds)
php-channel-deepend.src: I: checking
php-channel-deepend.src: I: checking-url http://www.survivethedeepend.com/
(timeout 10 seconds)
php-channel-deepend.src: I: checking-url
http://pear.survivethedeepend.com/channel.xml (timeout 10 seconds)
php-channel-deepend.noarch: I: checking
php-channel-deepend.noarch: I: checking-url http://www.survivethedeepend.com/
(timeout 10 seconds)
php-channel-deepend.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
* final provides are sane:
php-channel(pear.survivethedeepend.com) = 1.3
php-channel-deepend = 1.3-1.fc13
+ final requires
/usr/bin/pear
php-pear(PEAR)
* %check is not present; no test suite provide.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets are OK (pear channel..)
* no documentation
* %install start with rm
* %clean ok
Just a note, As I hate wilcards in %file, I will prefer
%{pear_xmldir}/%{name}.xml
*** 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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 597410] Review Request: php-deepend-Mockery - Mockery is a simple but flexible PHP mock object framewor
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=597410 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@famillecollet.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2010-07-11 12:09:24 EDT --- Could you please update to the latest version (0.6.3) for review ? First notes: BuildRequires: php-pear = 1:1.4.0 Must be 1:1.4.9-1.2 (which is the first version in fedora with the needed macros) -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 577975] Review Request: kde-plasma-daisy - A versatile application launcher
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=577975 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-07-11 12:25:42 EDT --- kde-plasma-daisy-0.0.4.23-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kde-plasma-daisy-0.0.4.23-2.fc13 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 610934] Review Request: go - The Google Go Programming Language
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=610934
--- Comment #7 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2010-07-11 12:44:08 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
- there seems to be a bug in the files section. Since 8* is generated on ix86,
and 6* on x86_64, you probably want
%ifarch %ix86
%{_bindir}/8*
%else
%{_bindir}/6*
%endif
... common filenames here ...
Nah, some of the binaries are generated as 6* regardless of what architecture
you're on.
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 577975] Review Request: kde-plasma-daisy - A versatile application launcher
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=577975 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-07-11 12:30:13 EDT --- kde-plasma-daisy-0.0.4.23-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kde-plasma-daisy-0.0.4.23-2.fc12 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 456353] Review Request: libffado - Free firewire audio driver library
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=456353 --- Comment #35 from Stefan Richter stefan-r-r...@s5r6.in-berlin.de 2010-07-11 13:15:52 EDT --- I see libavc1394 only being used in tests/test-echo.cpp (which is probably not important to ffado users, in contrast to ffado developers) and in src/bounce/bounce_slave_avdevice.cpp. The latter does not work on top of the new firewire kernel drivers at all since it also attempts to replace the local node's Configuration ROM for which we don't have an ioctl in firewire-core and never will. (The bounce device seems to implement a rudimentary audio device on the local node.) Hence I do not see any harm done by a build without libavc1394. But admittedly I have not actually tested a build after libavc1394 headers being removed from the system yet. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 569492] Review Request: Ailurus - make Linux easier to use for newcomers
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=569492
--- Comment #11 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 14:05:47
EDT ---
I just noticed that you need a sponsor, so I can't officially review this one,
sorry.
here's an **INFORMAL** review (since I promised). It'll make the package better
and easier for a sponsor to review. She/he will have to do it again though.
+ OK
- NA
? ISSUE
=
+ Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
+ Spec file matches base package name.
+ Spec has consistant macro usage.
+ Meets Packaging Guidelines.
+ License
+ License field in spec matches
+ License file included in package
+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
+ Sources match upstream md5sum:
[an...@localhost rpmbuild]$ md5sum ailurus-10.06.8.tar.gz
3eac90bab9fe03c53f5ce5ec067cc693 ailurus-10.06.8.tar.gz
[an...@localhost rpmbuild]$ md5sum SOURCES/ailurus-10.06.8.tar.gz
3eac90bab9fe03c53f5ce5ec067cc693 SOURCES/ailurus-10.06.8.tar.gz
- Package needs ExcludeArch
+ BuildRequires correct
? Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
+ Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
+ Package has a correct %clean section.
+ Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
? Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
+ Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
- .so files in -devel subpackage.
- -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- .la files are removed.
+ Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file
- Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
+ Package has no duplicate files in %files.
? Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
? Package owns all the directories it creates.
? No rpmlint output.
SHOULD Items:
+ Should build in mock.
+ Should build on all supported archs
+ Should function as described.
- Should have sane scriptlets.
- Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
+ Should have dist tag
+ Should package latest version
- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)
Issues:
1. Please use %find_lang for locale files
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files
2. I see a url.py with reference to repositories such as adobe and Rpmfusion.
What exactly is the purpose of these? If these are used to configure these 3rd
party repos, I'll have to confirm with legal if the package can be added into
fedora. (otherwise we would have already had a nifty tool to set up Rpmfusion
IMO)
Please contact fedora-legal and get this clarified.
3. The files section needs some cleaning up.
%{datadir}/icons - %{datadir}/icons/*
From:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#.25files_section
If you list a directory in the %files section, then you are claiming that
this package owns that subdirectory and all files and directories in it,
recursively (all the way down) if they are present in the build root
4. rpmlint output is downright UGLY :P
[an...@localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint ailurus.spec
../SRPMS/ailurus-10.06.8-0.fc13.src.rpm
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/*.rpm
ailurus.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C makes Linux easier to use
ailurus.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://ailurus.googlecode.com/
IncompleteRead(0 bytes read)
ailurus.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C makes Linux easier to use
ailurus.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 10.06.8-1 ['10.06.8-0.fc14',
'10.06.8-0']
ailurus.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://ailurus.googlecode.com/
IncompleteRead(0 bytes read)
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/info_pane.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/support/windowpos.py 0644L
/usr/bin/env
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/ubuntu/libserver.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/support/terminal.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/gnome/__init__.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/ubuntu/quick_setup.py 0644L
/usr/bin/env
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/loader.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
ailurus.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dbus-1/system.d/cn.ailurus.conf
ailurus.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/ailurus/strings.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
[Bug 476056] Review Request: gnustep-back - The GNUstep backend library
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=476056 --- Comment #11 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2010-07-11 14:19:49 EDT --- Should be done. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 581104] Review Request: lv2-EQ10Q-plugins - Parametric equalizer lv2 plugin
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=581104 David Cornette r...@davidcornette.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #17 from David Cornette r...@davidcornette.com 2010-07-11 14:42:23 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: lv2-EQ10Q-plugins Short Description: LV2 Plugin: Parametric equalizer with 12 different filter types Owners: davidcornette Branches: F-12 F-13 InitialCC: -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608470] Review Request: perl-Test-Script-Run - Test scripts with Perl
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=608470 --- Comment #5 from Jérôme Fenal jfe...@free.fr 2010-07-11 14:54:28 EDT --- All comments applied : http://github.com/jfenal/perl-Test-Script-Run/raw/master/perl-Test-Script-Run.spec http://github.com/downloads/jfenal/perl-Test-Script-Run/perl-Test-Script-Run-0.04-3.fc13.src.rpm http://github.com/downloads/jfenal/perl-Test-Script-Run/perl-Test-Script-Run-0.04-3.fc13.noarch.rpm -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 476056] Review Request: gnustep-back - The GNUstep backend library
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=476056
--- Comment #12 from Michel Alexandre Salim michael.silva...@gmail.com
2010-07-11 16:08:28 EDT ---
Only two minor changes needed:
- untabify line 24
- mark documentation files as %doc
See below for details:
#+TODO: TODO(t) WAIT(w@/!) FAIL(f@) | DONE(d) N/A(n)
* TODO Review [87%]
** DONE Names [2/2]
*** DONE Package name
*** DONE Spec name
** DONE Meets
[[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines][guidelines]]
** DONE source files match upstream
sha1sum: 7b6d46976bd56496d0715c4e150b85c924658b60
** DONE License [3/3]
*** DONE License is Fedora-approved
*** DONE License field accurate
*** DONE License included iff packaged by upstream
** DONE rpmlint [2/2]
*** DONE on src.rpm
minor glitch:
gnustep-back.src:24: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line
1, tab: line 24)
if using Emacs, C-x h M-x untabify would convert all tabs to spaces
*** DONE on x86_64.rpm
$ rpmlint ~/Downloads/gnustep-back*
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
** DONE Language locale [3/3]
*** DONE Spec in US English
*** DONE Spec legible
*** N/A Use %find_lang to handle locale files
** DONE Build [3/3]
*** DONE Koji results
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2311879
*** DONE BRs complete
*** DONE Directory ownership
** TODO Spec inspection [7/8]
*** N/A ldconfig for libraries
*** DONE No duplicate files
*** DONE File permissions
*** DONE Filenames must be UTF-8
*** DONE Has %clean section
(except F-13+:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean)
*** DONE %buildroot cleaned on %install
*** DONE Macro usage consistent
*** TODO Documentation [2/3]
N/A If large docs, separate -doc
DONE %doc files are non-essential
FAIL Documentation files tagged %doc
- State FAIL from TODO [2010-07-11 Sun 22:06] \\
%{_datadir}/GNUstep/Documentation/Developer/Back/ should be marked as
such
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 433497] Review Request: swing-layout - Natural layout for Swing panels
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=433497 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2010-07-11 16:20:20 EDT --- Package Change Request === Package Name: swing-layout Branches: EL-6 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 502686] Review Request: wsdlpull - C++ Web Services client library
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=502686 --- Comment #12 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org 2010-07-11 16:50:11 EDT --- Spec: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/wsdlpull/123/wsdlpull.spec SRPM: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/wsdlpull/123/wsdlpull-1.23-2.fc13.src.rpm I eventually did it :) Normally, all your feedbacks (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502686#c6) have been taken into account. I've renamed the two generated binaries, namely wsdl and schema, into respectively wsdlpull and wsdlpull-schema, so as to avoid any name conflict. I've left the %doc in the -devel sub-package, though. Moreover, Fedora 13's rpmlint is stricter, and I have worked on reducing warnings. For instance, I had to add man pages (which I will of course submit upstream). Koji was migrated to a new version of software (v1.4, I believe) this week-end, and I could therefore not submit any task to it. Do not hesitate. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 612796] Review Request: python-ping - An implementation of the standard ICMP ping in pure Python.
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=612796 --- Comment #19 from Andrew Schomin and...@schomin.com 2010-07-11 20:19:12 EDT --- Looks like the links above were down today, but they should be working again now. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 569492] Review Request: Ailurus - make Linux easier to use for newcomers
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=569492 --- Comment #12 from homerxing homer.x...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 21:45:34 EDT --- Dear Ankur, Thank you very much! I will correct the errors as soon as possible. Best regards, Homer -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 179916] Review Request: docbook2X - Convert docbook into man and Texinfo
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=179916 Marc Bradshaw fed...@marcbradshaw.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Marc Bradshaw fed...@marcbradshaw.co.uk 2010-07-11 23:01:03 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: docbook2X New Branches: EL-6 Owners: deebs InitialCC: Branch for EL-6 does not appear to be created in cvs, have removed the nobranch file from EL-5 branch, please create branch for EL-6. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 427484] Review Request: publican-RedHat - Red Hat theme
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=427484 Ruediger Landmann rland...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Comment #6 from Ruediger Landmann rland...@redhat.com 2010-07-11 23:11:29 EDT --- I didn't run rpmlint to see if it dinged the license, but the license in the spec file (OPL + restrictions) is not allowed in Fedora: The package is now licensed CC-BY-SA, so this should no longer be a problem. Re-opening request New spec file: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/p/u/publican/publican-redhat.spec New SRPM: http://rlandmann.fedorapeople.org/publican/publican-redhat-2.0-0.fc13.src.rpm -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 427483] Review Request: publican-JBoss - JBoss Theme
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=427483 Ruediger Landmann rland...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||rland...@redhat.com Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Comment #9 from Ruediger Landmann rland...@redhat.com 2010-07-11 23:13:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) The license used is the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike. There are some troublesome aspects to this license. The package is now licensed CC-BY-SA, so this should no longer be a problem. Re-opening request New spec file: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/p/u/publican/publican-jboss.spec New SRPM: http://rlandmann.fedorapeople.org/publican/publican-jboss-1.9-0.fc13.src.rpm -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 576757] Review Request: moovida-plugins-good - Media Center
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=576757 Bug 576757 depends on bug 554243, which changed state. Bug 554243 Summary: Review Request: moovida - Media Center https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554243 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 576758] Review Request: moovida-plugins-bad - Media Center
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=576758 Bug 576758 depends on bug 554243, which changed state. Bug 554243 Summary: Review Request: moovida - Media Center https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554243 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 554243] Review Request: moovida - Media Center
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=554243 Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #29 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2010-07-11 23:33:52 EDT --- I think this review might have to be considered stalled. Last comment from Graeme was 2010-03-24, which is more than 3 months ago, I posted a request for status update over a week ago (2010-06-23), therefore according to policy: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews#Submitter_not_responding I am closing this as NOTABUG and marking as FE-DEADREVIEW in the hope that somebody else can start a new review. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 572515] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
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=572515 Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||al...@users.sourceforge.net Blocks|201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) | --- Comment #16 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2010-07-11 23:39:40 EDT --- Removing spurious FE-DEADREVIEW blocker bug, I assume that this review hasn't stalled as per: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 586291] Review Request: cURLpp - - C++ wrapper for libcURL
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=586291 Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||al...@users.sourceforge.net Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #10 from Alex Lancaster al...@users.sourceforge.net 2010-07-11 23:38:05 EDT --- Closing as NOTABUG as per: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573448] Review request: TinyCDB
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=573448 --- Comment #13 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 23:44:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) Chen, I'm affraid I won't have enough spare time to properly work on this package, feel free to take it if you want Regards Adrien Thanks for contributing to fedora, feel free to apply co-maintainer for all of my packages[1] after you get sponsored some time later :) [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/supercyper -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 612023] Review Request: tinycdb - Utility and library for manipulating constant databases
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=612023 Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mad...@mymadcat.com --- Comment #4 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 23:45:44 EDT --- *** Bug 573448 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573448] Review request: TinyCDB
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=573448 Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #14 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 23:45:44 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 612023 *** -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 569492] Review Request: Ailurus - make Linux easier to use for newcomers
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=569492
--- Comment #13 from homerxing homer.x...@gmail.com 2010-07-11 23:49:03 EDT
---
I have fixed some issues.
1. Adopt %find_lang for locale files
2. The strings in url.py pointing to repositories such as adobe and Rpmfusion,
are obsolete. If someone do a grep, he will find that the strings are not used
in any other files in ailurus directory. Therefore I remove these strings. I
think ailurus is certainly legal.
3. Clean up the files section
%{datadir}/icons - %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*/apps/ailurus.png
4. rpmlint output has no errors now.
5. Change the summary. New summary is:
A simple software center and GNOME tweaker
However, currently rpmlint outputs a warning:
$ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/ailurus-10.06.93-0.fc13.noarch.rpm
ailurus.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
ailurus.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://ailurus.googlecode.com/
IncompleteRead(0 bytes read)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
I don't know the reason. :(
Would you please tell me why?
New spec:
http://github.com/homerxing/Ailurus/raw/master/ailurus.spec
New SRPM:
http://homerxing.fedorapeople.org/ailurus-10.06.93-0.fc13.src.rpm
Koji built sucessfully.
Best regards,
Homer
--
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 612384] Review Request: teal - Verification utility and connection library
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=612384 --- Comment #4 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-07-12 00:54:58 EDT --- $ rpmlint teal.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint teal-1_40b-2.fc14.i686.rpm teal.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multithreaded - multitudinous, multitude, multicolored teal.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US verilog - verily, Verizon, veritably 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. $ rpmlint teal-devel-1_40b-2.fc14.i686.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint teal-1_40b-2.fc14.src.rpm teal.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US multithreaded - multitudinous, multitude, multicolored teal.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US verilog - verily, Verizon, veritably 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226239] Merge Review: perl-Archive-Tar
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=226239 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2010-07-12 01:49:03 EDT --- That's typo. Correct request: New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Archive-Tar Short Description: A module for Perl manipulation of .tar files Owners: mmaslano psabata ppisar Branches: devel InitialCC: perl-sig It was marked as dead and I need re-open this cvs in devel branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
