[Bug 187351] Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bmpx - Media player with the WinAmp GUI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187351 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 04:33 EST --- I haven't filed them. Btw, glibc-common does not include plain af and et locales at all. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190139] Review Request: rapidsvn - Graphical interface for the Subversion version-control system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rapidsvn - Graphical interface for the Subversion version-control system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190139 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 07:05 EST --- OK, I've added the libtool fix. Thanks very much for all your investigation work on this unusual problem, Jason. Can you give the following a go? New spec/SRPM: Spec URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/rapidsvn.spec SRPM URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/rapidsvn-0.9.1-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190318] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Request-Params - Retrieve GET/POST Parameters from HTTP Requests
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Request-Params - Retrieve GET/POST Parameters from HTTP Requests https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190318 Bug 190318 depends on bug 190316, which changed state. Bug 190316 Summary: Review Request: perl-Email-MIME-Modifier - Modify Email::MIME Objects Easily https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190316 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190319] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Recorder - Record interaction with web sites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Recorder - Record interaction with web sites https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190319 Bug 190319 depends on bug 190318, which changed state. Bug 190318 Summary: Review Request: perl-HTTP-Request-Params - Retrieve GET/POST Parameters from HTTP Requests https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190318 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190000] Review Request: partimage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: partimage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 13:53 EST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
Bad:
- Buildroot should be
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
Corrected.
- Server requires should probably be %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Had that originally. Changed back.
- Doesn't build on x86_64:
Does now.
rpmlint isn't very happy w/ the 32bit package either.
Well, it should quit being so pedantic.
W: partimage conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/pam.d/partimage
W: partimage conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/security/console.apps/partimage
Added noreplace.
E: partimage use-old-pam-stack /etc/pam.d/partimage
E: partimage use-old-pam-stack /etc/pam.d/partimage
Corrected.
W: partimage-server conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/logrotate.d/partimaged
W: partimage-server conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/pam.d/partimaged
W: partimage-server conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/rc.d/init.d/partimaged
Added noreplace.
E: partimage-server non-readable /etc/partimaged/partimagedusers 0600
Corrected.
E: partimage-server executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/rc.d/init.d/partimaged
Not marking it as a config file.
E: partimage-server incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/partimaged
Corrected.
W: partimage-server file-not-in-%lang
/usr/share/man/en/man5/partimagedusers.5.gz
W: partimage-server file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/man/en/man8/partimaged.8.gz
Corrected.
W: partimage-server incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/partimaged $prog
W: partimage-server incoherent-init-script-name partimaged
Corrected.
E: partimage-server use-old-pam-stack /etc/pam.d/partimaged
E: partimage-server use-old-pam-stack /etc/pam.d/partimaged
E: partimage-server use-old-pam-stack /etc/pam.d/partimaged
Corrected.
Indifferent:
- %description is a bit long winded...
Removed last two paragraphs. People don't read anyway.
- chmod of pam.d/partimaged followed by install -m seems redundant.
Look more closely. There are two pam.d files: partimage and partimaged. One I
have to change the SYSCONFDIR in during installation, so I use sed and chmod.
The other I can install directly, so I use install.
NEEDSWORK
Grade me again, TA.
Package and spec file can be found at http://people.redhat.com/dcantrel/core/
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190396] Review Request: netpanzer - An Online Multiplayer Tactical Warfare Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netpanzer - An Online Multiplayer Tactical Warfare Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190396 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 14:12 EST --- Updated package: Spec URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/SPECS/netpanzer.spec SRPM URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/5/SRPMS/netpanzer-0.8-3.src.rpm Changes: - Changed netpanzer.png to comply with freedesktop.org standards. - Added scripts to update the icon cache after installing Notes: Thanks for the support Hans de Goede. I updated the packages with your notes from Comment #6. I now know about the freedesktop standard :-) If you have any notes, just say and I'll update it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190144] Review Request: hevea - LaTeX to HTML translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hevea - LaTeX to HTML translator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190144 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189727] Review Request: Scribes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Scribes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189727 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190396] Review Request: netpanzer - An Online Multiplayer Tactical Warfare Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netpanzer - An Online Multiplayer Tactical Warfare Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190396 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 15:58 EST --- Looking good - Approved! Go create yourself an account as described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors#head-a89c07b5b8abe7748b6b39f0f89768d595234907 Follow all the steps there, don't forget signing the CLA! (or other steps) once thats done I'll get a mail that you're awaiting sponsorship and I'll sponsor you. While waiting for me sponsoring you you can install the client-side plague (thats the FE buildsystem) tools and setup your CVS environment variables. These are the next steps as described on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors After that import your package, tag it and request your first build :) Don't be alarmed if the build fails with some missing gcc deps, rawhide and thus the devel tree (where are initial imports are done) is broken atm. Once your build has succeeded don't forget to close this bug with a resolution of nextrelease. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190139] Review Request: rapidsvn - Graphical interface for the Subversion version-control system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rapidsvn - Graphical interface for the Subversion version-control system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190139 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 16:27 EST --- OK, with the libtool fix everything is fixed. Rawhide is broken at the moment so no development x86_64 builds (keep that in mind when you check in). So, to recap the initial issues: X license field matches the actual license. Fixed. X license is open source-compatible and included upstream but is not included in the package. Fixed. X package fails to build in mock (development, x86_64). Fixed (bulds properly; not your fault rawhide is busted) X rpmlint is silent. It's been quieted. X shared libraries are present; ldconfig should be called but isn't. ldconfig is called properly. X headers present in main package. Headers have been moved off to a -devel subpackage. I have no remaining objections. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190396] Review Request: netpanzer - An Online Multiplayer Tactical Warfare Game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netpanzer - An Online Multiplayer Tactical Warfare Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190396 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 16:45 EST --- I've just sponsored you, you should have CVS access now, but don't know how long it takes for the system to pick this up. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190397] Review Request: netpanzer-data - Data files for netpanzer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netpanzer-data - Data files for netpanzer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190397 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 17:02 EST --- I'll keep my review short (again) as Andreas has already done most of the work. I only see 1 problem, why all the BuildReqs? I see no need for desktop-file-utils and most of the others seem superficial too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190397] Review Request: netpanzer-data - Data files for netpanzer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netpanzer-data - Data files for netpanzer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190397 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 17:11 EST --- I already thought it might be such a thing (a strange configure script) in that case leaving the BR's in is fine. A comment in the .spec about this might be a good idea though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190000] Review Request: partimage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: partimage https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 17:43 EST --- Well, it manages to build on x86_64, but failed on i386. *shrug* trying one more time. Other changes looked good, and rpmlint is happy again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 190397] Review Request: netpanzer-data - Data files for netpanzer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netpanzer-data - Data files for netpanzer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190397 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 17:45 EST --- Updated package: Spec URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/SPECS/netpanzer-data.spec SRPM URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/5/SRPMS/netpanzer-data-0.8-3.src.rpm Changes: - Removed desktop-file-utils BuildReq entry Notes: Commenting the BuildReq indeed is good, so I did it ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189092] Review Request: boo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: boo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189092
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 18:20 EST ---
My latest build attempt on FC5 x86_64 at your latest srpm attempt gives:
Processing files: boo-0.7.5.2013-4
error: File not found: /var/tmp/boo-0.7.5.2013-4-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/boo
error: File not found by glob:
/var/tmp/boo-0.7.5.2013-4-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/mono/*
error: File not found by glob:
/var/tmp/boo-0.7.5.2013-4-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/*.pc
error: File not found by glob:
/var/tmp/boo-0.7.5.2013-4-root-mockbuild/usr/share/mime/packages/*
Note the /usr/lib64. The build logs are installing that stuff in /usr/lib.
Redefining %{_libdir} is one way to fix this.
Also looking the build logs, it's dropping the /usr prefix for the mime stuff
because the configure script is not figuring out a shared-mime-info prefix.
Summary:
shared-mime-info prefix:
gtksourceview-1.0 prefix: /usr
boo prefix: /usr
test -z /share/mime/packages/ || mkdir -p --
/var/tmp/boo-0.7.5.2013-4-root-mockbuild/share/mime/packages/
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189092] Review Request: boo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: boo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189092 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 19:00 EST --- Yep - I'm getting that problem here as well. The configure.in script looks fine and passing --prefix=/usr on the configure line makes no difference what-so-ever, so something is going wrong somewhere, I'm just at a loss as to where. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 180319] Review Request: svnmailer - Tool to post subversion repository commit information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: svnmailer - Tool to post subversion repository commit information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180319 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-04 21:04 EST --- The documentation may actually be of some use, as it's needed to generate a config file. But it does make sense to split it off. You may want to remove an annoying extra doc folder by doing in the %files doc section something like %doc docs/* But that's optional. Also a good idea would be a version bump to 1.0.8. For now: - rpmlint checks return clean - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license (Apache Software License) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on FC5 (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 188176] Review Request: gauche-gtk - Gauche extension module to use GTK
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gauche-gtk - Gauche extension module to use GTK https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188176 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-05 00:00 EST --- Building on i386 with the fixed gauche gets further, but then fails: gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -I'/usr/lib/gauche/0.8.7/include' -fomit-frame-pointer -ma rch=i686 -DUSE_I686_PREFETCH `pkg-config --cflags gtkglext-1.0` -c -o glgdGraph.o glgdGraph.c In file included from /usr/include/pango-1.0/pango/pangofc-font.h:25, from /usr/include/pango-1.0/pango/pangoft2.h:29, from glgd.h:21, from gauche-glgd.h:26, from glgdGraph.c:12: /usr/include/ft2build.h:56:38: error: freetype/config/ftheader.h: No such file or directory and then there are cascading errors off of that; I'll attach the build log if you're interested. I thought the problem might be a missing BR: freetype-devel, but no luck. usr/include/freetype2/freetype/config/ftheader.h does exist. It almost seems as if a call to pkgconfig --cflags freetype2 needs to be made. I'm not really sure what's up. I know you wouldn't have submitted these packages if they didn't build for you, but I'm just having no luck at all building them. Are you able to do mock builds? I'm pretty sure my build setup is working OK, so you should be able to see the same failures I'm seeing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
