[Bug 691597] Review Request: libopkele - A C++ implementation of the OpenID decentralized identity system
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=691597
--- Comment #5 from Hushan Jia h...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 02:09:33 EDT ---
Informal review :)
[ok] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces.
[ok] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
.
[ok] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec
[ok] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
[?] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[?] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
The license of aux.d/ltmain.sh is GPLv2+, COPYING is MIT license, so the
license would be MIT and GPLv2+?
[ok] MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.[4]
[?] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
$ rpmlint libopkele.spec libopkele-2.0.4-1.fc14.src.rpm
libopkele.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US implementor -
implementer, implement or, implement-or
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[ok] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[ok] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
[ok] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
koji scratch build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2962667
[ok] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[ok] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[N/A] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[ok] MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[ok] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[N/A] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[ok] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
[ok] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)
[ok] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
[ok] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[ok] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[N/A] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
[ok] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present.
[ok] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[N/A] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[ok] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package.
[ok] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
[ok] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
[N/A] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. If you
[Bug 691027] Review Request: n2n - A layer-two peer-to-peer virtual private network
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=691027 --- Comment #10 from Hushan Jia h...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 02:11:10 EDT --- Hi Michel, I did an informal review for libopkele review request: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691597#c5 Thanks, Hushan -- 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 653800] Review Request: lde - Linux disk editor
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=653800
--- Comment #6 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pa...@hubbitus.info
2011-03-31 02:12:09 EDT ---
Mario, thank you for the support words.
(In reply to comment #4)
- The tab indents in the header should be tweaked a bit, for better
readability.
No. You just use another tab width :) Please see initial my comment.
- Use macros wherever possible: Replace all occurences of the package name
with %{name}.
Good catch. Fixed.
- Add a -p switch to the install calls to keep timestamps.
Fixed.
- The file allfs.h has the executable bit set, please remove it (of course
the bit itself, not the file ;-)
And it fixed also.
http://hubbitus.info/rpm/Fedora13/lde/lde-2.6.1-4.fc13.src.rpm
http://hubbitus.info/rpm/Fedora13/lde/lde.spec
--
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 692281] Review Request: hotot - Lightweight open source micro blogging client
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=692281 Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|martin.giesek...@uos.de Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-03-31 02:32:36 EDT --- I take this one and will do the review later today. -- 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 691997] Review Request: nhn-nanum-fonts - Nanum family of Korean TrueType fonts
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=691997 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 02:32:00 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Parag. I'll reflect your suggestions before importing the package into the git. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: nhn-nanum-fonts Short Description: Nanum family of Korean TrueType fonts Owners: ueno Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: fonts-sig i18n-team -- 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 166481] Review Request: ngrep - network grep
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=166481 Jan ONDREJ ondr...@salstar.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ondr...@salstar.sk --- Comment #15 from Jan ONDREJ ondr...@salstar.sk 2011-03-31 02:40:25 EDT --- I think you should set fedora-cvs flag to ? again. -- 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 226438] Merge Review: struts
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=226438 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 02:55:01 EDT --- Garreth, The package is orphaned so if you care about it you should take it and start maintaining it. -- 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 671862] Review Request: synapse - gnome-do alternative (no mono)
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=671862 --- Comment #16 from Renich Bon Ciric ren...@woralelandia.com 2011-03-31 02:58:44 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: synapse Short Description: a mono-free alternative to gnome-do Owners: renich mtasaka Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: renich mtasaka -- 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 671862] Review Request: synapse - gnome-do alternative (no mono)
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=671862 --- Comment #17 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 03:00:44 EDT --- Ah, no, I have not approved this package yet. Please make SCM request for libzeitgeist (which I already approved) first. -- 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 226548] Merge Review: xalan-j2
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=226548 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com, ||socho...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|socho...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 03:00:47 EDT --- I'll do merge review, akurtakov will do the fixing -- 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 166481] Review Request: ngrep - network grep
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=166481 Oliver Falk oli...@linux-kernel.at changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Oliver Falk oli...@linux-kernel.at 2011-03-31 03:04:38 EDT --- Great. We've wasted time for bureaucracy where it wasn't needed... :-/ But OK, you just followed the rules. cvs-flag set. -- 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 671862] Review Request: synapse - gnome-do alternative (no mono)
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=671862 --- Comment #18 from Renich Bon Ciric ren...@woralelandia.com 2011-03-31 03:06:29 EDT --- woops, understood ;) -- 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 674188] Review Request: libzeitgeist - Library to access zeitgeist; needed by synapse
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=674188 --- Comment #32 from Renich Bon Ciric ren...@woralelandia.com 2011-03-31 03:09:36 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: libzeitgeist Short Description: Client library for zeitgeist Owners: renich mtasaka Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: renich mtasaka -- 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 226438] Merge Review: struts
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=226438 --- Comment #4 from Garrett Holmstrom gho...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 03:11:13 EDT --- I have no particular interest in this package. If and when it is retired this merge review can be closed. -- 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 691619] Review Request: openvas-manager - Open Vulnerability Assessment (OpenVAS) Manager (edit)
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=691619 --- Comment #6 from Michal Ambroz re...@seznam.cz 2011-03-31 03:14:01 EDT --- Hi Carl, the src.rpm is really there - I have double-checked now. I am able to download. I even see it the http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/ directory. Please can you check you do not have some problems with your proxy? Space is just typo - I will fix it. Mik -- 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 691619] Review Request: openvas-manager - Open Vulnerability Assessment (OpenVAS) Manager (edit)
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=691619 --- Comment #7 from Michal Ambroz re...@seznam.cz 2011-03-31 03:24:12 EDT --- Link http://wald.intevation.org/frs/download.php/858/openvas-manager-2.0.2.tar.gz is the correct one as well and is working now. It is also officiall download link taken from http://www.openvas.org/. Please check again. Mik -- 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 674188] Review Request: libzeitgeist - Client library for zeitgeist
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=674188 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |libzeitgeist - Library to |libzeitgeist - Client |access zeitgeist; needed by |library for zeitgeist |synapse | --- Comment #33 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 03:32:20 EDT --- Please set fedora-cvs flag to ? (and corfirm that you can do so). -- 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 671862] Review Request: synapse - gnome-do alternative (no mono)
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=671862 --- Comment #19 from Renich Bon Ciric ren...@woralelandia.com 2011-03-31 03:42:49 EDT --- SPEC: http://renich.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/synapse.spec SRPM: http://renich.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/synapse-0.2.4.1-3.fc14.src.rpm Changes made... I hope ;) They build fine in mock. -- 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 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
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=676129 --- Comment #14 from Michal Schmidt mschm...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 03:44:57 EDT --- Oh, I see. It is unfortunate that CXXFLAGS in the Makefile contain optimization flags and important macro definitions together. So another option is to modify qconf.pro, adding a way to accept CXXFLAGS from the environment, like here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2007-October/msg01455.html -- 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 640455] Review Request: python-pyro - Pyro is short for PYthon Remote Objects.
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=640455 Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||karlthe...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|karlthe...@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 226548] Merge Review: xalan-j2
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=226548
--- Comment #2 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2011-03-31
03:50:21 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
xalan-j2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlet - servile,
serviette, servility
xalan-j2.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
xalan-j2.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-2.7.1/NOTICE.txt
xalan-j2.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-2.7.1/LICENSE.txt
xalan-j2.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/java/jaxp_transform_impl.jar
/etc/alternatives
xalan-j2.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-2.7.1/KEYS
xalan-j2.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/xalan-j2.jar
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: W: no-documentation
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runXalan.sh 0644L /bin/sh
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runXalan.sh
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runDerby.sh 0644L /bin/sh
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runDerby.sh
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runExtConnection.sh 0644L /bin/sh
xalan-j2-demo.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/xalan-j2/samples/extensions/sql/runExtConnection.sh
xalan-j2-javadoc.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development/Documentation
xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/xsltc/README.xsltc
xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/xsltc/README.xslt
xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/resources/script.js
xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/xsltc/resources/script.js
xalan-j2-manual.noarch: W: dangling-symlink
/usr/share/doc/xalan-j2-manual-2.7.1/apidocs /usr/share/javadoc/xalan-j2
xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US stylesheets -
style sheets, style-sheets, stylishness
xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US translets -
trans lets, trans-lets, translates
xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: non-standard-group Text Processing/Markup/XML
xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: no-documentation
xalan-j2-xsltc.noarch: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/xsltc.jar
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 21 warnings.
You know what to do :-) Except maybe those examples...if they run fine in-place
perhaps they could be made +x, otherwise just leave them -x
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[!] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 1.1 and ASL 2.0 and W3C
If I understand LICENSE.txt correctly, parts of xalan are generic BSD license
(JLex, CUP)
[x] 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.
[!] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
xsltc, manual and javadoc subpackages don't have LICENSE.txt and don't require
base package
[x] 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.
MD5SUM this package: fc805051f0fe505c7a4b1b5c8db9b9e3
[!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
Missing zip BR
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
xsltc subpackage doesn't require jpackage utils, but its other deps should pull
it in so no problem
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[!] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
Remove clean and rm -rf
[Bug 674188] Review Request: libzeitgeist - Client library for zeitgeist
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=674188 Renich Bon Ciric ren...@woralelandia.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #34 from Renich Bon Ciric ren...@woralelandia.com 2011-03-31 03:46:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #33) Please set fedora-cvs flag to ? (and corfirm that you can do so). Missed it the first time. It looks like I can ;) -- 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 226548] Merge Review: xalan-j2
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=226548 Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- 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 597681] Review Request: kupfer - A free software 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=597681 --- Comment #14 from Renich Bon Ciric ren...@woralelandia.com 2011-03-31 03:50:03 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) Is there some progress on this review? I saw that 204 is released: http://kaizer.se/wiki/kupfer/ Sorry, I'm a bit busy with synapse: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671862 But I will get back to this once I'm finished, 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 691276] Review Request: thai-arundina-fonts - Thai fonts aiming at Latin glyph size compatibility
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=691276 --- Comment #2 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 03:57:08 EDT --- Thanks for looking at this. I added fontconfig files: Spec URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/thai-arundina-fonts/thai-arundina-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/thai-arundina-fonts/thai-arundina-fonts-0.1.2-2.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 680593] Review Request: perl-Browser-Open - Open a browser in a given URL
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=680593 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.com -- 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 691276] Review Request: thai-arundina-fonts - Thai fonts aiming at Latin glyph size compatibility
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=691276 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 04:33:34 EDT --- koji build - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2962822 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 691276] Review Request: thai-arundina-fonts - Thai fonts aiming at Latin glyph size compatibility
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=691276 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 04:48:22 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Parag. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: thai-arundina-fonts Short Description: Thai fonts aiming at Latin glyph size compatibility Owners: ueno Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: fonts-sig i18n-team -- 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 692395] New: Review Request: nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts - Nanum Gothic Coding family of Korean TrueType fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts - Nanum Gothic Coding family of Korean TrueType fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692395 Summary: Review Request: nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts - Nanum Gothic Coding family of Korean TrueType fonts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: du...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts/nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts.spec SRPM URL: http://ueno.fedorapeople.org/nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts/nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts-1.500-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Nanum Gothic Coding fonts are set of Gothic Korean font faces suitable for source code editing, designed by Sandoll Communication and published by NHN Corporation. Font description page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/NHN_Nanum_Gothic_Coding_fonts -- 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 691972] Review Request: zanata-python-client - library and client for working with Zanata server
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=691972 --- Comment #3 from James Ni j...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 05:05:46 EDT --- Hi, Dean Thanks for your review and comment, i have update the package and spec file based on your comment Spec URL: http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/zanata-python-client/zanata-python-client.spec SRPM URL: http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/zanata-python-client/zanata-python-client-1.2.1-1.fc13.src.rpm Best Regards -- 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 692395] Review Request: nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts - Nanum Gothic Coding family of Korean TrueType fonts
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=692395 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 05:11:00 EDT --- Review: + koji build - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2962841 + source verified as (sha1sum) dd881c871f346f48327d95d540925870eb1ca7da ../SOURCES/NanumGothic_Coding.zip dd881c871f346f48327d95d540925870eb1ca7da NanumGothic_Coding.zip + packaging looks 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 692395] Review Request: nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts - Nanum Gothic Coding family of Korean TrueType fonts
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=692395 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 05:21:22 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Parag. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts Short Description: Nanum Gothic Coding family of Korean TrueType fonts Owners: ueno Branches: f14 f15 InitialCC: fonts-sig i18n-team -- 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 692281] Review Request: hotot - Lightweight open source micro blogging client
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=692281 --- Comment #2 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-03-31 06:23:10 EDT --- Hi Rahul, here are some initial comments: - The package currently fails building with mock/koji because of the following missing BRs: intltool desktop-file-utils: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2962943 - Some of the js files in data/js are published under different licenses: * jquery.js: GPLv2 * js-oauth.js: LGPLv3 only * sha1.js: BSD This must be reflected in the License field. - Since I can't find any system dependent files, you should create a noarch package. - Don't explicitly clean the buildroot in %install as all the other buildroot stuff is omitted too. - Add --skip-build to python setup install. - Please ask upstream to add file COPYING with the LGPLv3 license text. The python source files should also get the proper copyright headers as requested by the (L)GPL. -- 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 692437] New: Review Request: tycho - plugins and extensions for building Eclipse plugins and OSGI bundles with Maven
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: tycho - plugins and extensions for building Eclipse plugins and OSGI bundles with Maven https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692437 Summary: Review Request: tycho - plugins and extensions for building Eclipse plugins and OSGI bundles with Maven Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: socho...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/packages/tycho.spec SRPM URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/packages/tycho-0.10.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Tycho is a set of Maven plugins and extensions for building Eclipse plugins and OSGI bundles with Maven. Eclipse plugins and OSGI bundles have their own metadata for expressing dependencies, source folder locations, etc. that are normally found in a Maven POM. Tycho uses native metadata for Eclipse plugins and OSGi bundles and uses the POM to configure and drive the build. Tycho supports bundles, fragments, features, update site projects and RCP applications. Tycho also knows how to run JUnit test plugins using OSGi runtime and there is also support for sharing build results using Maven artifact repositories. Note that package is bundling some dependencies, but this has been approved for bootstrapping by FPC: https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/59 -- 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 666233] Review Request: gnome-paint - Easy to use paint program for GNOME
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=666233 --- Comment #6 from Tareq Al Jurf talj...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 07:19:56 EDT --- All done except for the mimeinfo, could you explain why it's necessary? Looking back at the spec, I believe I'm not installing any mime info. -- 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 692466] New: Review Request: rubygem-kwalify - A parser and schema validator for YAML and JSON
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-kwalify - A parser and schema validator for YAML and JSON https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692466 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-kwalify - A parser and schema validator for YAML and JSON Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mgold...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/rubygem-kwalify.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/rubygem-kwalify-0.7.2-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Kwalify is a parser, schema validator, and data binding tool for YAML and JSON. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2963270 -- 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 684407] Review Request: perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio - Perl interface to Monotone via automate stdio
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=684407
Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmasl...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 08:23:22
EDT ---
- rpmlint OK
- package must be named according to Guidelines OK
- spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK
- package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK
- package must be licensed with Fedora approved license OK
- license field must match actual license OK
- text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK
- sources must match the upstream source OK
3f0984cb465867071042c156c2f5c316
- package MUST successfully compile and build OK
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2963286
- architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK
- build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
- handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK
- shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK
- packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK
- package must own all directories that it creates OK
- permissions on files must be set properly OK
- package must consistently use macros OK
- package must contain code, or permissable content OK
- large documentation must go in a -doc OK
- %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK
- header files must be in a -devel package OK
- static libraries must be in a -static package OK
- library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK
- devel package usually require base package OK
- packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK
- GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK
- packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK
rpm -qp --provides
~/Downloads/perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio-0.12-1.fc16.noarch.rpm
perl(Monotone::AutomateStdio) = 0.12
perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio = 0.12-1.fc16
rpm -qp -requires
~/Downloads/perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio-0.12-1.fc16.noarch.rpm | sort
perl = 0:5.008005
perl(base)
perl(Carp)
perl(constant)
perl(Cwd)
perl(Encode)
perl(Exporter)
perl(File::Basename)
perl(File::Spec)
perl(IO::File)
perl(IO::Handle)
perl(IO::Poll)
perl(IPC::Open3)
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.3)
perl(POSIX)
perl(Socket)
perl(strict)
perl(Symbol)
perl(warnings)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1
I have few comments on packaging. Shouldn't be mtn-tester also installed or run
as test?
Also upstream created strange pod file. Usually are pods created from pm files,
but that's not blocker.
NOT 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 691096] Review Request: iperf3 - Measurement tool for TCP/UDP bandwidth performance
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=691096
Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com 2011-03-31 08:34:20 EDT ---
Hey G.
Just a few quick things I noticed to be fixed before I do my review checklist.
;)
1. The spec and Name: should be 'iperf3' here, right? Or are you intending to
replace/update the existing iperf package?
2. The version here is not right. You should not have things like 'b4' in
version. ;)
See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages
I think you want:
Version: 3.0
Release: 0.0.b4%{?dist}
Then when the final 3.0 comes out, Release goes to 1 and it updates correctly
from this beta version.
If you make changes to packaging before that you can use:
Release: 0.1.b4%{?dist}
etc. And the update path works. ;)
3. You probibly don't want to ship the static library:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Packaging_Static_Libraries
I would suggest removing the .a and header files at the end of %install and
then commenting out the -devel subpackage entirely. You could add it back in
when/if they have a dynamic library or someone really needs the static one. ;)
Anyhow, if you could look at those, I could start a formal review after that.
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 690359] Review Request: perl-Shipwright - Build and Manage Self-contained Software Bundle
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=690359
Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmasl...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 08:35:26
EDT ---
- rpmlint OK
- package must be named according to Guidelines OK
- spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK
- package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK
- package must be licensed with Fedora approved license OK
- license field must match actual license OK
- text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK
- sources must match the upstream source OK
- package MUST successfully compile and build ?
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2959749
- architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK
- build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
- handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK
- shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK
- packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK
- package must own all directories that it creates OK
- permissions on files must be set properly OK
- package must consistently use macros OK
- package must contain code, or permissable content OK
- large documentation must go in a -doc OK
- %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK
- header files must be in a -devel package OK
- static libraries must be in a -static package OK
- library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK
- devel package usually require base package OK
- packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK
- GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK
- packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK
Couldn't you replace bundled Module::Install from inc to system's
Module::Install?
Also test part during build didn't pass in koji:
t/10.flags.t ok
# Failed test 'Build.PL and Makefile.PL are run'
# at /builddir/build/BUILD/Shipwright-2.4.23/blib/lib/Shipwright/Test.pm line
244.
# 'building tgz_build
# '
# doesn't match '(?ms-xi:run, run, Build\.PL.*run, run, Makefile\.PL)'
# Looks like you failed 1 test of 140.
t/71.script_cmds.t ..
Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
Failed 1/140 subtests
(less 106 skipped subtests: 33 okay)
build Foo-Bar configure part failed, last output of build.log is:
build configure part in Foo-Bar with cmd: /usr/bin/perl
-I/tmp/shipwright_build_o8CDqf/inc -MShipwright::Util::CleanINC Makefile.PL
LIB=/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x/lib/perl5/
PREFIX=/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x
running shipwright build command: /usr/bin/perl
-I/tmp/shipwright_build_o8CDqf/inc -MShipwright::Util::CleanINC Makefile.PL
LIB=/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x/lib/perl5/
PREFIX=/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x
Can't locate Cwd.pm in @INC (@INC contains: blib/lib blib/arch
/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x/lib/perl5/x86_64-linux-thread-multi
/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x/lib/perl5/site_perl
/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x/lib/perl5 /tmp/shipwright_build_o8CDqf/inc .
/usr/lib64/perl5 /usr/share/perl5) at inc/Module/Install.pm line 110.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at inc/Module/Install.pm line 110.
Compilation failed in require at Makefile.PL line 1.
BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at Makefile.PL line 1.
at bin/shipwright-builder line 573
main::_install('Foo-Bar', 'GLOB(0x16a2830)') called at bin/shipwright-builder
line 412
main::install() called at bin/shipwright-builder line 276
# Failed test '/tmp/shipwright_install_bpN95x/lib/perl5/Foo/Bar.pm exists'
# at t/hello/fs.t line 189.
# Looks like you failed 1 test of 38.
t/hello/fs.t
Dubious, test returned 1 (wstat 256, 0x100)
Failed 1/38 subtests
t/hello/git.t ... 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 691317] Review Request: libmash - Mash is a small library for using real 3D models within a Clutter scene
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=691317
--- Comment #5 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me 2011-03-31
08:48:46 EDT ---
There are several issues still, see review below:
* TODO Review [60%]
- [X] Names [2/2]
- [X] Package name
- [X] Spec name
- [X] Package version [2/2]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning
- [X] Version number
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Version_Tag
- [X] Release tag
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Release_Tag
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages
- [X] Meets
[[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines][guidelines]]
- [X] Source files match upstream
$ sha1sum mash-0.1.0.tar.bz2 ../SOURCES/mash-0.1.0.tar.bz2
162242e7008c76b1a481db10bb32c0d5454a94ff mash-0.1.0.tar.bz2
162242e7008c76b1a481db10bb32c0d5454a94ff ../SOURCES/mash-0.1.0.tar.bz2
- [-] [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries][No
bundled libraries]]
bundles RPly: http://w3.impa.br/~diego/software/rply/
- [-] License [3/4]
- [X] License is Fedora-approved
- [X] No licensing conflict
- [-] License field accurate
see bundled issue. RPly is under MIT, must be mentioned if
bundling is approved
- [X] License included iff packaged by upstream
- [X] rpmlint [2/2]
- [X] on src.rpm
libmash.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US animatable -
stableman, imitable
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
== safe to ignore
- [X] on x86_64.rpm
libmash.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US animatable -
stableman, imitable
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
- [-] Language locale [2/3]
- [X] Spec in US English
- [-] Spec legible
the word 'Mash' probably should not be in the summary
(rpmlint does not catch it because it's not libmash)
- [X] Use %find_lang to handle locale files
N/A
- [-] Build [1/3]
- [X] Koji results
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2963278
- [-] BRs complete
There's an optional dependency on libmx, should it not be
added as a BR?
- [-] Directory ownership
- girepository-1.0 is owned by gdk-pixbuf2 so it's probably OK
- but %{_datadir}/gir-1.0 is not owned by any package pulled in
by mash
- [-] Spec inspection [8/10]
- [X] ldconfig for libraries
- [X] No duplicate files
- [X] File permissions
- [X] Filenames must be UTF-8
- [X] no BuildRoot definition
([[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag][except if
targeting EPEL5]])
- [X] No %clean section
(except for RHEL:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean)
- [-] %buildroot cleaned on %install
This still needs to be done
- [X] Macro usage consistent
- [-] Documentation [2/3]
- [X] If large docs, separate -doc
N/A
- [X] %doc files are non-essential
- [-] Relevant docs packaged
Shouldn't README be included?
- [X] Development [5/5]
- [X] Headers in -devel
- [X] If versioned .so's, unversioned in -devel
- [X] Static only if necessary, put in -static
N/A
- [X] -devel, -static requires main
- [X] No .la
--
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 684407] Review Request: perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio - Perl interface to Monotone via automate stdio
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=684407 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Moschny thomas.mosc...@gmx.de 2011-03-31 09:01:18 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) I have few comments on packaging. Shouldn't be mtn-tester also installed or run as test? From the README: Please note that automated testing of this library module is still `work in progress'. There is a test harness called mtn-tester that can be used to test most important features of this library. However, it does require not only the installation of Monotone, as you would expect, but also a test database with certain revisions and files in it. At the moment this is done by using a dedicated branch in the main Monotone database found at monotone.ca. The test branch is called net.venge.monotone.contrib.lib.automate-stdio.test. In time I hope to write a Monotone emulator that generates the required output to test the library, or perhaps just have a smaller database generated on the fly. So I'd say mtn-tester should neither be run nor installed. In theory, I could create a Monotone database with that branch in it and include it in the package, and generate a temporary key on the fly, but that's a lot of effort for little gain. Also upstream created strange pod file. Usually are pods created from pm files, In what way is it strange? What do you suggest? I could talk to upstream and ask him to include the docs in the .pm and generate the .pod from that. but that's not blocker. NOT APPROVED So, what is the blocker then? -- 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 682754] Review Request: perl-MooseX-GlobRef - Store a Moose object in glob reference
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=682754 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 09:04:32 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-MooseX-GlobRef Short Description: Store a Moose object in glob reference Owners: mmaslano ppisar psabata Branches: 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 683587] Review Request: gsissh - An implementation of the SSH protocol with GSI authentication
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=683587 Andrew Elwell andrew.elw...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrew.elw...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|andrew.elw...@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 166481] Review Request: ngrep - network grep
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=166481 --- Comment #17 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 09:19:51 EDT --- Well, I don't know what bureaucracy you're complaining about, but you are not listed as comaintainer on any branch in pkgdb and it would be rather rude to just make someone the owner of an additional branch without consulting them. Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 684407] Review Request: perl-Monotone-AutomateStdio - Perl interface to Monotone via automate stdio
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=684407 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 09:21:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) (In reply to comment #1) I have few comments on packaging. Shouldn't be mtn-tester also installed or run as test? From the README: Please note that automated testing of this library module is still `work in progress'. There is a test harness called mtn-tester that can be used to test most important features of this library. However, it does require not only the installation of Monotone, as you would expect, but also a test database with certain revisions and files in it. At the moment this is done by using a dedicated branch in the main Monotone database found at monotone.ca. The test branch is called net.venge.monotone.contrib.lib.automate-stdio.test. In time I hope to write a Monotone emulator that generates the required output to test the library, or perhaps just have a smaller database generated on the fly. So I'd say mtn-tester should neither be run nor installed. In theory, I could create a Monotone database with that branch in it and include it in the package, and generate a temporary key on the fly, but that's a lot of effort for little gain. I agree, hopefully tests will be better in future. Also upstream created strange pod file. Usually are pods created from pm files, In what way is it strange? What do you suggest? I could talk to upstream and ask him to include the docs in the .pm and generate the .pod from that. That would be nice. but that's not blocker. NOT APPROVED So, what is the blocker then? 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 691997] Review Request: nhn-nanum-fonts - Nanum family of Korean TrueType fonts
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=691997 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 09:25:23 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 674188] Review Request: libzeitgeist - Client library for zeitgeist
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=674188 --- Comment #35 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 09:24:24 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 691276] Review Request: thai-arundina-fonts - Thai fonts aiming at Latin glyph size compatibility
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=691276 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 09:25:10 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 692395] Review Request: nhn-nanum-gothic-coding-fonts - Nanum Gothic Coding family of Korean TrueType fonts
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=692395 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 09:25:39 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 682754] Review Request: perl-MooseX-GlobRef - Store a Moose object in glob reference
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=682754 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 09:24:40 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 682754] Review Request: perl-MooseX-GlobRef - Store a Moose object in glob reference
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=682754 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-03-31 09:43:42 -- 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 692466] Review Request: rubygem-kwalify - A parser and schema validator for YAML and JSON
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=692466 Oxana Kurysheva okurysh...@yahoo.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||okurysh...@yahoo.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|okurysh...@yahoo.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Oxana Kurysheva okurysh...@yahoo.com 2011-03-31 10:00:55 EDT --- I'll review it -- 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 692541] New: Review Request: rep-gtk - GTK+ binding for librep Lisp environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rep-gtk - GTK+ binding for librep Lisp environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692541 Summary: Review Request: rep-gtk - GTK+ binding for librep Lisp environment Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: b...@bbbs.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://b.bbbs.net/sawfish/rep-gtk.spec SRPM URL: http://b.bbbs.net/sawfish/rep-gtk-0.90.5-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: This is a binding of GTK+ for the librep Lisp interpreter. It is based on Marius Vollmer's guile-gtk package (initially version 0.15, updated to 0.17), with a new glue-code generator. --- This is my first package and I need a sponsor. This package is needed by Sawfish. -- 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 692543] New: Review Request: sawfish - An extensible window manager for the X Window System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sawfish - An extensible window manager for the X Window System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692543 Summary: Review Request: sawfish - An extensible window manager for the X Window System Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: b...@bbbs.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://b.bbbs.net/sawfish/sawfish.spec SRPM URL: http://b.bbbs.net/sawfish/sawfish-1.8.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Sawfish is an extensible window manager which uses a Lisp-based scripting language. All window decorations are configurable and the basic idea is to have as much user-interface policy as possible controlled through the Lisp language. Configuration can be accomplished by writing Lisp code in a personal .sawfishrc file, or using a GTK+ interface. Sawfish is mostly GNOME compliant --- This is my first package and I need a sponsor. -- 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 692537] New: Review Request: librep - An embeddable LISP environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: librep - An embeddable LISP environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=692537 Summary: Review Request: librep - An embeddable LISP environment Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: b...@bbbs.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://b.bbbs.net/sawfish/librep.spec SRPM URL: http://b.bbbs.net/sawfish/librep-0.91.1-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: This is a lightweight Lisp environment for UNIX. It contains a Lisp interpreter, byte-code compiler and virtual machine. Applications may use the Lisp interpreter as an extension language, or it may be used for standalone scripts. Originally inspired by Emacs Lisp, the language dialect combines many of the elisp features while trying to remove some of the main deficiencies, with features from Common Lisp and Scheme. --- This is my first package and I need a sponsor. This package is needed by lib-rep and Sawfish. -- 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 522821] Review Request: bluetile - A modern tiling window manager with a gentle learning curve
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=522821
Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||fedora-review+
Bug 522821 depends on bug 634052, which changed state.
Bug 634052 Summary: Review Request: ghc-ConfigFile - configuration file library
for Haskell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634052
What|Old Value |New Value
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
Resolution||ERRATA
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
--- Comment #21 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2011-03-31
10:16:43 EDT ---
[+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
rpmlint -i *.rpm ../bluetile.spec
bluetile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bluetile
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
bluetile.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-bluetile-session
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[+]MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+]MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[+]MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
Naming-Yes
Version-release - Matches
License - OK, BSD 3 clause variant
No prebuilt external bits - OK
Spec legibity - OK
Package template - OK
Arch support - OK
Libexecdir - Used to store three files used by bluetile executable
rpmlint - OK
changelogs - OK
Source url tag - OK, validated.
Buildroot is ignored - Not present
%clean is ignored - Not present
Build Requires list - OK
Summary and description - OK
API documentation - None, it is an executable package.
[+]MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
Licensed with BSD 3clause variant license.
[+]MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+]MUST: 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 must be included in %doc.
LICENSE file is included in /usr/share/doc/bluetile-{ver} folder
[+]MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+]MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+]MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source,as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
md5sum bluetile-0.5.3.tar.gz
6c3aecd280640f8435a8400e102cae95 bluetile-0.5.3.tar.gz
md5sum built/bluetile-0.5.3-2.fc15.src/bluetile-0.5.3.tar.gz
6c3aecd280640f8435a8400e102cae95
built/bluetile-0.5.3-2.fc15.src/bluetile-0.5.3.tar.gz
[+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Built on x86_64.
[+]MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+]MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[NA]MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly using the %find_lang macro
[NA]MUST: Packages stores shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun.
[+]MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
Checked with rpmquery --list
[NA]MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review.
[+]MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
Checked with rpmquery --whatprovides.
[+]MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[+]MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
Checked with ls -lR
[+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+]MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[NA]MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[NA]MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA]MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix
(e.g.libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must
go in a -devel package.
[NA]MUST: devel packages must
[Bug 692541] Review Request: rep-gtk - GTK+ binding for librep Lisp environment
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=692541 Kim B. Heino b...@bbbs.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||692537 -- 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 692541] Review Request: rep-gtk - GTK+ binding for librep Lisp environment
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=692541 Kim B. Heino b...@bbbs.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||692543 -- 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 692537] Review Request: librep - An embeddable LISP environment
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=692537 Kim B. Heino b...@bbbs.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||692541 -- 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 692537] Review Request: librep - An embeddable LISP environment
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=692537 Kim B. Heino b...@bbbs.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||692543 -- 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 692543] Review Request: sawfish - An extensible window manager for the X Window System
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=692543 Kim B. Heino b...@bbbs.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||692537, 692541 -- 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 676129] Review Request: qconf - Allows you to have a nice configure script for your qmake-based project
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=676129 --- Comment #15 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru 2011-03-31 10:17:01 EDT --- Ok. I have added such patch. Have a look at https://github.com/drizt/psi-plus/blob/be2dc571a94fb34f7dd4033d630a98b16e0793bb/qconf-1.4-optflags.patch https://github.com/drizt/psi-plus/blob/be2dc571a94fb34f7dd4033d630a98b16e0793bb/qconf.spec -- 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 675963] Review Request: perl-MDV-Packdrakeng - Simple Archive Extractor/Builder
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=675963 --- Comment #2 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 10:27:53 EDT --- BuilRequires were added. Build passed. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2963641 -- 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 692281] Review Request: hotot - Lightweight open source micro blogging client
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=692281 --- Comment #3 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 10:36:56 EDT --- Fixed build in mock and confirmed it works http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/hotot.spec Fixed license tag Made package noarch although a so file is in there Filed the licensing issue upstream at https://code.google.com/p/hotot/issues/detail?id=326 -- Not changing the clean buildroot thing because it is helpful for quick local rpmbuild testing. Also --skip-build causes the desktop file and locale files to be not part of the buildroot. Not changing this either for 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 692281] Review Request: hotot - Lightweight open source micro blogging client
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=692281 --- Comment #4 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 10:41:16 EDT --- Koji scratch build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2963674 -- 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 691317] Review Request: libmash - Mash is a small library for using real 3D models within a Clutter scene
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=691317
--- Comment #6 from Richard Hughes rhug...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 10:46:57 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #5)
- [-] [[http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries][No
bundled libraries]]
bundles RPly: http://w3.impa.br/~diego/software/rply/
I've sent a patch upstream to the mash project to use the system rply -- and
included that patch in version -2. This means that although rply is in the mash
tarball, the system version is used. I've therefore added rply-devel as a BR.
- [-] Spec legible
the word 'Mash' probably should not be in the summary
(rpmlint does not catch it because it's not libmash)
Fixed in -2.
- [-] BRs complete
There's an optional dependency on libmx, should it not be
added as a BR?
It's only used by the not-installed demo lighting program, and I've added a
note in -2 about the missing dep.
- [-] Directory ownership
- girepository-1.0 is owned by gdk-pixbuf2 so it's probably OK
- but %{_datadir}/gir-1.0 is not owned by any package pulled in
by mash
I think it's best to own both in this case, which I've done in -2.
- [-] %buildroot cleaned on %install
This still needs to be done
This package is suitable for F15 and rawhide, so no need for F10 and below
compatibility.
- [-] Relevant docs packaged
Shouldn't README be included?
Good catch, thanks. Fixed in -2.
New SRPM:
http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/temp/libmash-0.1.0-2.fc15.src.rpm
New Spec: http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/temp/libmash.spec
New Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2963688
The rpmlint output is unchanged. Thanks for the super-quick review!
Richard.
--
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 692281] Review Request: hotot - Lightweight open source micro blogging client
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=692281 --- Comment #5 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-03-31 10:51:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Made package noarch although a so file is in there Where did you find the .so file? $ rpmls hotot-0.9.5-2.20110331hg.fc16.noarch.rpm | fgrep .so is silent. -- 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 692281] Review Request: hotot - Lightweight open source micro blogging client
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=692281 --- Comment #6 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 10:58:50 EDT --- Never mind. I was doing another build of a unrelated package and confused between them. -- 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 677946] Review Request: liblouisutdml - Braille transcription library for UTDML documents
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=677946 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||methe...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|methe...@gmail.com -- 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 681393] Review Request: perl-Nagios-Plugin-WWW-Mechanize - Login to a web page as a user and get data as a Nagios 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=681393 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Nagios-Plugin-WWW-Mech |perl-Nagios-Plugin-WWW-Mech |anize-0.13-3.fc14 |anize-0.13-3.el6 -- 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 681393] Review Request: perl-Nagios-Plugin-WWW-Mechanize - Login to a web page as a user and get data as a Nagios 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=681393 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 11:17:54 EDT --- perl-Nagios-Plugin-WWW-Mechanize-0.13-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- 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 692543] Review Request: sawfish - An extensible window manager for the X Window System
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=692543 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rkhad...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 11:18:36 EDT --- *** Bug 431249 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 431249] Review Request: sawfish - An extensible window manager for the X Window System.
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=431249 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE --- Comment #18 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 11:18:36 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 692543 *** -- 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 692466] Review Request: rubygem-kwalify - A parser and schema validator for YAML and JSON
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=692466 --- Comment #2 from Oxana Kurysheva okurysh...@yahoo.com 2011-03-31 11:55:07 EDT --- The spec has one problem with the compliance with the guidelines. Please, fix this issue. * Add %define ruby_sitelib %(ruby -rrbconfig -e puts Config::CONFIG['sitelibdir']) to the spec rmplint is silent: rpmlint rubygem-kwalify-0.7.2-1.fc14.src.rpm rubygem-kwalify.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) validator - invalidator, validation, validate rubygem-kwalify.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US validator - invalidator, validation, validate This two may be omitted. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. I can't find any other issues. -- 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 692281] Review Request: hotot - Lightweight open source micro blogging client
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=692281
--- Comment #7 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-03-31
12:21:00 EDT ---
The package looks almost fine now. Just change the permissions of the following
files to 0644:
hotot/ext/org.hotot.imageupload/entry.js
hotot/ext/ext.js
$ rpmlint *.rpm
hotot.noarch: W: no-documentation
hotot.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/hotot/ext/org.hotot.imageupload/entry.js
hotot.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/hotot/ext/ext.js
hotot.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hotot
hotot.src: W: invalid-url Source0: hotot-0.9.5-8bd3e1986200.tar.bz2
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings.
All warnings are expected and can be ignored.
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
- multiple licensing scenario: LGPLv3+ and LGPLv3 and BSD and GPLv2
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source.
$ rpmdev-diff -c hotot-0.9.5-8bd3e1986200.tar.bz2
hotot-0.9.5-8bd3e1986200.tar.bz2
is silent
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: When compiling C, C++, or Fortran files, %{optflags} must be applied.
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[X] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
- set file permissions of hotot/ext/org.hotot.imageupload/entry.js and
hotot/ext/ext.js to 0644
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[.] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[.] MUST: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency.
[.] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file.
[+] MUST: .desktop files must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[+] MUST: Python eggs must be built from source. They cannot simply drop an egg
from upstream into the proper directory.
[+] MUST: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[+] MUST: If egg-info files are generated by the modules build scripts they
must be included in the package.
[.] MUST: When building a compat package, it must install using easy_install -m
so it won't conflict with the main package.
[.] MUST: When building multiple versions (for a compat package) ...
[.] SHOULD: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface
should provide egg info.
[X] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[.] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[.] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of
[Bug 225619] Merge Review: bluez-hcidump
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=225619 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 12:39:32 EDT --- Now at 2.0. . . -- 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 538057] Review Request: rhnmd - Red Hat Network Monitoring Daemon
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=538057 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 12:56:16 EDT --- rhnmd-5.3.8-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- 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 673030] Review Request: perl-Locale-US - Two letter codes for state identification in the United States and vice versa
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=673030 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 12:57:01 EDT --- perl-Locale-US-1.2-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- 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 538057] Review Request: rhnmd - Red Hat Network Monitoring Daemon
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=538057 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||rhnmd-5.3.8-1.fc14 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- 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 662604] Review Request: ibus-unikey - A Vietnamese engine for IBus input platform that uses Unikey.
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=662604 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 12:57:46 EDT --- ibus-unikey-0.5.1-5.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository. -- 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 479978] Review Request: newmat - C++ matrix 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=479978 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter -- 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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites
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=539693 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 12:59:34 EDT --- plowshare-0.9.4-0.5.svn1391.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. -- 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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites
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=539693 --- Comment #40 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 13:00:03 EDT --- plowshare-0.9.4-0.5.svn1391.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- 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 673030] Review Request: perl-Locale-US - Two letter codes for state identification in the United States and vice versa
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=673030 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Locale-US-1.2-2.fc15 |perl-Locale-US-1.2-2.fc14 -- 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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites
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=539693 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|plowshare-0.9.4-0.5.svn1391 |plowshare-0.9.4-0.5.svn1391 |.fc13 |.fc14 -- 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 673030] Review Request: perl-Locale-US - Two letter codes for state identification in the United States and vice versa
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=673030 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-03-31 12:59:51 EDT --- perl-Locale-US-1.2-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. -- 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 673030] Review Request: perl-Locale-US - Two letter codes for state identification in the United States and vice versa
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=673030 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Locale-US-1.2-2.fc14 |perl-Locale-US-1.2-2.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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites
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=539693 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||plowshare-0.9.4-0.5.svn1391 ||.fc13 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-03-31 12:59:42 -- 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 225626] Merge Review: brltty
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=225626 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 12:39:58 EDT --- Ping? -- 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 225615] Merge Review: binutils
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=225615 --- Comment #17 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 12:38:32 EDT --- Any updates on the bundling? -- 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 226117] Merge Review: mailman
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=226117 --- Comment #30 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 12:40:36 EDT --- . .. which is resolevd. So where are we now? -- 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 226204] Merge Review: nss
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=226204 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 12:41:07 EDT --- Ping? -- 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 226510] Merge Review: udev
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=226510 --- Comment #19 from Harald Hoyer har...@redhat.com 2011-03-31 12:52:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) In attempting to take a look at this, I ran across: checking for USBUTILS... configure: error: Package requirements (usbutils = 0.82) were not met: Looks like the BuildRequires should be versioned. done... $ grep usbutils udev.spec BuildRequires: usbutils = 0.82 -- 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 225974] Merge Review: krb5
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=225974 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 12:40:09 EDT --- Ping? -- 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 613001] Review Request: Heimdal - Alternative Kerberos implementation
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=613001 --- Comment #27 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com 2011-03-31 13:18:48 EDT --- Submitted bug 692606 to ask for alternatives support in krb5. -- 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 226510] Merge Review: udev
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=226510 --- Comment #20 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 13:20:21 EDT --- Cool, thanks! Starting over on current rawhide SRPM: udev.src:182: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 129, tab: line 182) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. udev.src: W: invalid-url Source0: ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/hotplug/udev-167.tar.bz2 urlopen error ftp error: [Errno 111] Connection refused The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. These are the only things not addressed above. These are new, and I'm imagining are ok: udev.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/share/pkgconfig/udev.pc A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. udev.i686: W: cross-directory-hard-link /etc/udev/makedev.d /var/lib/udev File is hard linked across directories. This can cause problems in installations where the directories are located on different devices. udev.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary start_udev Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. Otherwise, it looks good. -- 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 226510] Merge Review: udev
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=226510 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-03-31 12:40:46 EDT --- Ping? -- 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 675426] Review Request: imap-upload - A tool for uploading a local mbox file to IMAP4 server
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=675426 --- Comment #4 from Jean-Francois Saucier jsauc...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 13:29:41 EDT --- Thanks a lot for the review, I will talk with upstream to add a license in the source header for the future release. Also, I will remove the white line in the final spec as I haven't thought of graphical tools. -- 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 675426] Review Request: imap-upload - A tool for uploading a local mbox file to IMAP4 server
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=675426 Jean-Francois Saucier jsauc...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Jean-Francois Saucier jsauc...@gmail.com 2011-03-31 13:31:23 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: imap-upload Short Description: A tool for uploading a local mbox file to IMAP4 server Owners: jfsaucier Branches: f14 f15 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 675426] Review Request: imap-upload - A tool for uploading a local mbox file to IMAP4 server
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=675426 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-03-31 13:40:49 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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
