[Bug 189656] Review Request: lilypond - A typesetting system for music notation
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: lilypond - A typesetting system for music notation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189656 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 02:28 EST --- I've decided to go ahead and create a lilypond-doc package, since upstream maintains provides a tarball for it. Review request coming soon... -- 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 192502] New: Review Request: lilypond-doc - HTML documentation for lilypond
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192502 Summary: Review Request: lilypond-doc - HTML documentation for lilypond Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://qspencer.homeip.net/rpm/lilypond-doc-2.8.3-1.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://qspencer.homeip.net/rpm/lilypond-doc.spec Description: This package contains extensive HTML documentation for lilypond. -- 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 191604] Review Request: lineakd - linux easy-access-key daemon
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: lineakd - linux easy-access-key daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191604 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 03:07 EST --- Spec URL: http://forevermore.net/files/packages/lineak/lineakd.spec SRPM URL: http://forevermore.net/files/packages/lineak/lineakd-0.8.4-2.src.rpm - Added missing build requires. - Added AUTHORS and COPYING to -devel, just for good measure. - Fixed %post/un script to not cause errors. - Fix download URL As for the commenting, it's mainly just a pattern I picked up when managing huge specs -- makes it a lot easier to separate sections visually, and appears only to cause problems when using the -p option for %post/un. Something's definitely wrong with the comment stuff, though. Even looks like it extends beyond rpmlint, since as I was playing with the specs, it looks like the problem extends to rpm itself, which is why I got rid of the -p notation (which fixes the problem). I created a bug to pass along the info: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192506 -- 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 191605] Review Request: lineak_defaultplugin - default actions for lineakd
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: lineak_defaultplugin - default actions for lineakd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191605 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 03:09 EST --- SRPM URL: http://forevermore.net/files/packages/lineak/lineak_defaultplugin-0.8.4-2.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 191606] Review Request: lineak_kdeplugins - KDE-based actions for lineakd
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: lineak_kdeplugins - KDE-based actions for lineakd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191606 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 03:09 EST --- SRPM URL: http://forevermore.net/files/packages/lineak/lineak_kdeplugins-0.8.4-2.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 191607] Review Request: lineak_xosdplugin - Onscreen display support for lineakd
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: lineak_xosdplugin - Onscreen display support for lineakd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191607 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 03:09 EST --- SRPM URL: http://forevermore.net/files/packages/lineak/lineak_xosdplugin-0.8.4-2.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 165311] Review Request: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems
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: Tiger, security auditing on UNIX systems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165311 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- 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 192524] New: Review Request: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192524 Summary: Review Request: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/SPECS/knemo.spec SRPM URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/5/SRPMS/knemo-0.4.0-1.src.rpm Description: KNemo displays for every network interface an icon in the systray. Tooltips and an info dialog provide further information about the interface. Passive popups inform about interface changes. A traffic plotter is also integrated. It polls the network interface status every second using the ifconfig, route and iwconfig tools. -- 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 176580] Review Request: x11-ssh-askpass -- the cool brother of gnome-ssh-askpass
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: x11-ssh-askpass -- the cool brother of gnome-ssh-askpass https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176580 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 05:05 EST --- * Sat May 20 2006 Enrico Scholz [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 1.2.4.1-0.2 - removed '%config' from the app-defaultsdir - do not own the app-defaultsdir anymore - added some tricks to the -random patch to avoid removal of the clear-the-passphrase-memset() due to optimization http://ensc.de/fedora/x11-ssh-askpass.spec http://ensc.de/fedora/x11-ssh-askpass-1.2.4.1-0.2.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 190156] Review Request: php-pear-HTTP
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: php-pear-HTTP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190156 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 05:06 EST --- Needs work: * don't remove the buildroot in %prep (it breaks rpmbuild -bi --short-circuit) * do the sanity check in %check * it would be nice to add || : at the end of the pear lines in the scriptlets, to make sure they won't return a failure and block the whole rpm transaction Minor: * Use BuildArch: instead of the full BuildArchitectures * Include the LICENCE as you did with php-pear-Mail. This is not a requirement though (it would be if the tarball shipped the license, which is not the case here) -- 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 173459] Review Request: initng
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: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 05:42 EST --- Forgot: when following the -lib suggestion you should prevent version mix either by: | Requires: %name-lib = %version-%release in main; or by | Conflicts: %name %version-%release | Conflicts: %name %version-%release in -lib. -- 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 192540] New: Review Request: cal3d - A skeletal based 3-D character animation library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192540 Summary: Review Request: cal3d - A skeletal based 3-D character animation library Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/cal3d.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/cal3d-0.10.0-1.src.rpm *** NOTE *** You may have to download the src rpm from http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/cal3d-0.10.0-1.src.rpm Description: Cal3d is a skeletal based 3-D character animation library written in C++ in a platform-/graphic API-independent way. -- 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 185951] Review Request: amsn : msn messenger clone
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: amsn : msn messenger clone https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=185951 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 07:02 EST --- (In reply to comment #14) It also includes a copy of the BWidget tcl package, which I've already packaged for FE. Just add Requires: bwidget and don't include the local copy. The one that is used by amsn is modified, amsn won't work with the original one. (In reply to comment #15) (In reply to comment #13) amsn builds against local copies of libpng, libjpeg, and zlib, which is a no-no for Fedora Extras. This must be changed to build against the system copies. You don't have to remove them from the sources, just make sure it links against the existing libpng/libjpeg/zlib, and add BuildRequires: libpng-devel libjpeg-devel zlib-devel I had a similar issue to this with gtkwave, which bundles zlib and bzip2. I made absolutely sure that the system libraries were used by not only patching the Makefiles but deleting the bundled libraries from the unpacked sources in %prep so that there was no possibility of building and linking against them. Done, see: http://amsn.hoentjen.eu/download/amsn.spec http://amsn.hoentjen.eu/download/amsn-0.96-0.6.20060517svn.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 173459] Review Request: initng
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: initng https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #129586|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 07:21 EST --- Created an attachment (id=129723) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129723action=view) initng 0.6.7-2 spec file (In reply to comment #290) 1. core package contains development files (*.so); write Did I get you right now? | Requires(post): procps | ... | init=$(ps --no-headers -o '%%c' 1) | test x$init != xinitng || /sbin/ngc --quiet -c || : Thanks! That's a lot nicer! in -devel. Alternatively (I would prefer that), you should create a '-lib' subpackage with only the libraries and require this subpackage by -devel. Something like this? 2. the | if [ -x /usr/sbin/semanage ]; then | /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t init_exec_t /sbin/initng 2/dev/null || : | fi can be expressed shorter as | /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t init_exec_t /sbin/initng 2/dev/null || : Ok. The check was introduced since you pointed out that semanage doesn't exist in FC4... -- 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 192546] New: Review Request: gnubiff
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192546 Summary: Review Request: gnubiff Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/gnubiff/gnubiff.spec SRPM URL: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/gnubiff/gnubiff-2.2.0-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: Gnubiff is a mail notification program that periodically checks for mail and displays headers when new mail has arrived -- 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 192490] Review Request: python-ogg - A Python wrapper for the Ogg libraries
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: python-ogg - A Python wrapper for the Ogg libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192490 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 08:12 EST --- Hugo, Good to see you're packing more stuff for FE I'm glad I sponsored you. I'll try to review this for you, but I'm currently a bit busy. So this is as time permits. Because of this I'm not assigning this bug to myself untill I actually start the review, to give other reviewers a chance to beat me to it :) (Once a bug is assigned the person who has assigned the bug to himself is supposed todo the review) -- 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 192524] Review Request: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool
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: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192524 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 08:13 EST --- Hugo, Good to see you're packing more stuff for FE I'm glad I sponsored you. I'll try to review this for you, but I'm currently a bit busy. So this is as time permits. Because of this I'm not assigning this bug to myself untill I actually start the review, to give other reviewers a chance to beat me to 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 192524] Review Request: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool
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: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192524 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 08:52 EST --- We already have another review for knemo, Richard June came up with this package 5 weeks ago. I suggest you try to get in contact with him to decide who's going to do this package. If Richard doesn't want to maintain it feel free to reopen this review. Please take a look at bug #163776 before you start packaging something. BTW: Do not include *.la-files, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-2302ec1e1f44202c9cc4bcce24cb711266557ad7 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 189088 *** -- 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 189088] Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet.
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: knemo Network monitor applet. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189088 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 08:52 EST --- *** Bug 192524 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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 192144] Review Request: musicbox
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: musicbox https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192144 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 09:36 EST --- New spec file and srpm are here: http://glive.tuxfamily.org/fedora/musicbox/ -- 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 192546] Review Request: gnubiff
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: gnubiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192546 [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 192436] Review Request: xorg-x11-server-Xgl
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: xorg-x11-server-Xgl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192436 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 10:00 EST --- Hi Rudolf, The problem comes from the mesa version, the current version on FC5 does not contain bitset.h header file. There must be an error with the build of mesa in the package. ps: I think that the patch must be correct, another persons that me, have build it for X86_64 and they haven't give any feedback about that. -- 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 173459] Review Request: initng
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: initng
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 10:01 EST ---
#289
i have to correct myself. id suggets building it with:
cmake . -DBUILD_SELINUX:BOOL=ON -DCOUNT_ME:BOOL=OFF -DCMAKE_SKIP_RPATH:BOOL=ON
-DLIB_INSTALL_DIR:STRING=/%{_lib} -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS:STRING='%{optflags}'
make %{?_smp_mflags} VERBOSE=1
without the explcit setting its getting built 32 bit on x86_64 and the default
optflags should be used anyways to build it.
VERBOSE=1 with the make line will print the real output of the build. its
contraproductive to hide that because you cant see if its building right.
a hardcoded path makes a plugin yet segfault on x86_64 will be fixed in svn
soon.
--
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 192524] Review Request: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool
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: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192524 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | 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 187625] Review Request: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server
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: ices IceS is a source client for a streaming server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187625 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | 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 192432] Review Request: compiz
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: compiz https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192432 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 10:42 EST --- Hi Rudolf, It's the same mesa version problem which that of xgl. cf. bugid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192436 -- 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 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
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: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #127786|0 |1
is obsolete||
Attachment #128986|0 |1
is obsolete||
Attachment #129058|0 |1
is obsolete||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 10:58 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=129744)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129744action=view)
Patch for qt4-4.1.3-1.spec (lib vs. %{_libs} + owning of directories by
subpackages)
There was a */lib left. And %{qtdir}/plugins/ and %{qtdir}/{_lib}/ should be
owned by subpackages that install things in 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 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins
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: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:00 EST --- Changing FE-NEW to FE-REVIEW. -- 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 173459] Review Request: initng
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: initng
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173459
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:10 EST ---
1. core package contains development files (*.so); write
Did I get you right now?
sorry, not completely ;)
* you should add
| %post lib -p /sbin/ldconfig
| %postun lib -p /sbin/ldconfig
and remove the /sbin/ldconfig from main's %scriptlets
* I am not sure about the plugins (/%{_lib}/initng); I would see them
as part of the main-package and would not ship them in -lib.
Beside the devel-ifiles chicken-egg problem, the purpose of -lib is
to avoid heavy dependencies e.g. for GUIs which are using the initng
ifiles-parser.
| if [ -x /usr/sbin/semanage ]; then
|/usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t init_exec_t /sbin/initng
2/dev/null || :
| fi
can be expressed shorter as
| /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t init_exec_t /sbin/initng 2/dev/null
|| :
Ok. The check was introduced since you pointed out that semanage doesn't exist
in FC4...
My comment #239 was about a
| /usr/sbin/semanage fcontext -a -t init_exec_t /sbin/initng
statement *without* the trailing '|| :'
Current spec is ok regarding this issue.
--
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 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins
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: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:16 EST --- Created an attachment (id=129746) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129746action=view) Inherit distro CFLAGS Mike, This patch does the following: * [Blocker] Makes the package use the distro CFLAGS Most of the plugins weren't being compiled with the distro CFLAGS. Using the %configure macro takes care of that. * Adds perl(Net::SNMP) to the build requirements One less warning message from the configure. Suggestion: Could you also add the bugzilla ticket to one of the changelog entries? Hopefully these will be the last corrections. jpo -- 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 190156] Review Request: php-pear-HTTP
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: php-pear-HTTP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190156 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:27 EST --- Spec URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-HTTP.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-HTTP-1.4.0-3.fc5.src.rpm Mock Build.log : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-HTTP-build.log - Require pear = 1.4.9 - bundle the v3.01 PHP LICENSE file - use --packagingroot (instead of -R) - move check from install to check -- 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 192502] Review Request: lilypond-doc - HTML documentation for lilypond
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: lilypond-doc - HTML documentation for lilypond https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192502 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:34 EST --- Since this is just a doc package, a quick review should suffice: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * source files match upstream: 45622b94aba72994277d6a0d4fcf706c lilypond-2.8.3-1.documentation.tar.bz2 45622b94aba72994277d6a0d4fcf706c lilypond-2.8.3-1.documentation.tar.bz2-srpm * latest version is being packaged. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. Note: code-not-content rule does not apply as this is merely documentation for a package already in extras, placed in a separate package so that it can be non-arch-specific. 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 190956] Review Request: php-pear-Auth-SASL
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: php-pear-Auth-SASL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190956 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:51 EST --- Spec URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Auth-SASL.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Auth-SASL-1.0.1-2.fc5.src.rpm Mock build.log : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Auth-SASL-build.log -- 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 190156] Review Request: php-pear-HTTP
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: php-pear-HTTP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190156
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:53 EST ---
Review for release 3:
* RPM name is OK
* Source HTTP-1.4.0.tgz is the same as upstream
* Builds fine in mock
* rpmlint looks OK
* File list looks OK
* Works fine
APPROVED
Note : The line %{__install} -m 644 -c %{SOURCE1} LICENSE is more usually
found in %prep, but that's not a blocker.
--
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 192540] Review Request: cal3d - A skeletal based 3-D character animation library
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: cal3d - A skeletal based 3-D character animation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192540 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 11:57 EST --- oops, I meant to say above: *** NOTE *** You may have to download the src rpm from http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/ -- 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 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
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: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 12:05 EST --- Some pkgconfig files refere to -lQtGui64. I do not understand. Here they are: /usr/lib64/qt4/lib64/Qt3Support.pc /usr/lib64/qt4/lib64/QtGui.pc /usr/lib64/qt4/lib64/QtSvg.pc /usr/lib64/qt4/lib64/QtOpenGL.pc referes to -lQtOpenGL64. ld -lQtGui64 gives an error. Some .prl files have errors 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 190957] Review Request: php-pear-Net-Socket
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: php-pear-Net-Socket https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190957 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 12:17 EST --- Spec URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Net-Socket.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Net-Socket-1.0.6-2.fc5.src.rpm Mock build.log : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Net-Socket-build.log -- 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 192540] Review Request: cal3d - A skeletal based 3-D character animation library
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: cal3d - A skeletal based 3-D character animation library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192540 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 12:24 EST --- Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/cal3d.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/cal3d-0.10.0-2.src.rpm *** NOTE *** You may have to download the src rpm from: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/ %changelog * Sun May 21 2006 Christopher Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.10.0-2 - Move some devel documentation into doc package -- 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 190958] Review Request: php-pear-Net-SMTP
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: php-pear-Net-SMTP https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190958 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 12:50 EST --- Spec URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Net-SMTP.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Net-SMTP-1.2.8-2.fc5.src.rpm Mock build.log : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Net-SMTP-build.log -- 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 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
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: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #129745|0 |1
is obsolete||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 12:54 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=129761)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=129761action=view)
(v3) Patch for qt4-4.1.3-1.spec (lib vs. %{_libs} + owning of directories by
subpackages)
I found the bug of comment #109: when sed removes -L/usr/X11R6/lib, on
x86_64, it leaves 64. :-(
I hope this is the last lib64 issue.
--
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 189088] Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet.
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: knemo Network monitor applet.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189088
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 13:29 EST ---
Needs work:
* No downloadable source. Please give the full URL in the Source tag.
* Desktop file: vendor should be fedora (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#desktop)
* Desktop file: the Categories tag should contain Application and X-Fedora
(wiki: PackagingGuidelines#desktop)
* The translation files are not properly tagged, use the %find_lang macro
(wiki: Packaging/ReviewGuidelines)
* Scriptlets: missing gtk-update-icon-cache in %post and %postun (wiki:
ScriptletSnippets)
* Don't rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %prep, it breaks rpm -qi --short-circuit
* The -n %{name}-%{version} part in %setup is useless, it's already the
default
* export QTDIR=/usr/lib/qt-3.3/ should be replaced by:
unset QTDIR . %{_sysconfdir}/profile.d/qt.sh
export QTLIB=${QTDIR}/lib QTINC=${QTDIR}/include
and it should be moved at the top of %build
* %configure should be moved in %build
* The BuildRoot must be cleaned at the beginning of %install
* Use make install, not make install-strip. RPM will strip the binaries by
itself
* INSTALL is useless as a %doc, we're using RPM.
* %{_datadir}/*/*/*/* is a too generic, use %{_datadir}/icons/*/*/*/*.png
* The directory /usr/share/apps/knemo/ should be owned by the package
--
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 192144] Review Request: musicbox
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: musicbox https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192144 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 13:32 EST --- MD5Sums: 03f9eb2c446debd1e187d472c05dcad8 musicbox-0.2.3.tar.gz Good: * Source URL is canonical * Upstream source tarball verified * Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guide * Group Tag is from the official list * Buildroot has all required elements * All paths begin with macros * Desktop entry is fine * All directories are owned by this or other packages * All necessary BuildRequires listed. * All desired features are enabled * rpmlint produces no errors. * Builds fine in mock. Minor: * Unnecessary BuildRequirement: gtk2-devel (provided by libglade2-devel) * Don't package INSTALL doc, since it's the generic GNU file. You can fix the 2 minor issues when you import it into FE CVS. +1 APPROVE -- 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 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
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: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 13:52 EST ---
Thanks.
Spec Name or Url:
http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/qt4-4.1.3-2.spec
SRPM Name or Url:
http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/qt4-4.1.3-2.src.rpm
%changelog
* Sat May 20 2006 Rex Dieter rexdieter[AT]users.sf.net 4.1.3-2
- -mysql: use mysql_config for setting cflags/ldflags.
- -mysql: BR: mysql-devel 4.0
* Sat May 20 2006 Laurent Rineau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Fix the last reference to %{qtdir}/lib: use %{_lib} instead of lib.
- Fix the ownership of subpackages: they need to own parents of directories they
install files in.
--
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 191604] Review Request: lineakd - linux easy-access-key daemon
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: lineakd - linux easy-access-key daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191604 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 13:55 EST --- Unfortunately because you're not using the %post -p /sbin/ldconfig method, RPM will not automatically generate the Requires(post): /sbin/ldconfig dependency so you must add it manually. Also, you now have duplicates in %files. The no-documentation warning for lineakd-devel was bogus; there was no reason to try to fix it. X final provides and requires are sane. X no duplicates in %files. -- 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 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
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: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 14:21 EST --- qt4-4.1.3-2.spec fails to build, on x86_64: the configure line is: ./configure -v -no-rpath -prefix /usr/lib64/qt4 -libdir /usr/lib64/qt4/lib64 -docdir /usr/share/doc/qt4-doc-4.1.3 -platform linux-g++-64 -release -shared -no-exceptions -largefile -qt-gif -system-zlib -system-libpng -system-libjpeg -plugin-sql-mysql -I/usr/include/mysql -plugin-sql-psql -plugin-sql-odbc -plugin-sql-sqlite -cups -sm -stl -xcursor -xinerama -xshape -xrandr -xrender -xkb -fontconfig -tablet As you can see, mysql_ldflags seems empty! However: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/RPM $ mysql_config --libs | perl -pi -e s, -l/? \S+,,g -L/usr/lib64/mysql -L/usr/lib64 Maybe this is the %() that should be $(), as for %mysql_include. I do not know these two syntaxes. What is %global, instead of %define? -- 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 192524] Review Request: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool
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: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192524 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 14:45 EST --- Hi Christoph, I'm really sorry for not searching for the package in the FE-NEW as you noted... I usually search in the search query and yum repositories, and I don't know why I couldn't find it, maybe it was a typo :) Well, this will not happen again. Thanks for your input. I'm contacting the other packager to let him know of this. -- 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 189088] Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet.
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: knemo Network monitor applet. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189088 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 15:09 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) Needs work: * The directory /usr/share/apps/knemo/ should be owned by the package And it should be /usr/share/knemo/ not /usr/share/apps/knemo/ -- 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 189088] Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet.
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: knemo Network monitor applet. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189088 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 15:18 EST --- Per default, KDE applications use the /usr/share/apps instead of /usr/share. -- 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 192475] Review Request: perl-PadWalker - Play with other peoples' lexical variables
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-PadWalker - Play with other peoples' lexical variables https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192475 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 189088] Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet.
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: knemo Network monitor applet. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189088 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 15:26 EST --- Ugly :) But it seems you'r correct, sorry mybad. -- 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 192564] New: Review Request: uuid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192564 Summary: Review Request: uuid Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/uuid/uuid.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/uuid-1.4.2-1.src.rpm Description: OSSP uuid is a ISO-C:1999 application programming interface (API) and corresponding command line interface (CLI) for the generation of DCE 1.1, ISO/IEC 11578:1996 and RFC 4122 compliant Universally Unique Identifier (UUID). It supports DCE 1.1 variant UUIDs of version 1 (time and node based), version 3 (name based, MD5), version 4 (random number based) and version 5 (name based, SHA-1). Additional API bindings are provided for the languages ISO-C++:1998, Perl:5 and PHP:4/5. Optional backward compatibility exists for the ISO-C DCE-1.1 and Perl Data::UUID APIs. -- 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 189892] Review Request: dssi - Disposable Soft Synth Interface
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: dssi - Disposable Soft Synth Interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189892 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 15:58 EST --- After poking things a bit more, I think dssi-devel should Depend: on alsa-lib-devel, ladspa-devel, and liblo-devel. But not jack-devel, the dssi API itself does not use jack. Not so sure the examples package needs a versioned dependency on the main package. Any other dssi plugins wouldn't do so. And since its just a header file, I don't think the devel package actually needs to depend on the main package at all... (This would prevent mock from having to d/l and install dssi, which pulls in jack...) If you really wanted to reduce dependency bloat, you could split jack-dssi-host off into its own package, isolating the jack dependency, but I really don't think its worth going quite that far. Just rm-ing the .la files in %install seems marginally cleaner to me. And is what most other packages seem to do. -- 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 192524] Review Request: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool
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: knemo - A KDE network monitoring tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192524 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 16:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) BTW: Do not include *.la-files, see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-2302ec1e1f44202c9cc4bcce24cb711266557ad7 KDE's KControl files requires .la files to work properly, so we have to make an exception here ;-) -- 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 188180] Review Request: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
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: qt4: Qt GUI toolkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188180
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 16:08 EST ---
With these three lines, it seems to find the correct flags:
%global mysql_include $(mysql_config --include || echo
-I%{_includedir}/mysql)
%global mysql_libs $(mysql_config --libs || echo -L%{_libdir}/mysql)
%global mysql_ldflags $(echo %{mysql_libs} | perl -pi -e s, -l/?
\\\S+,,g)
See the extra quote of \ in mysql_ldflags.
--
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 177081] Review Request: nucleo
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: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 16:18 EST --- Okay, I have created a new spec file and SRPM for this. Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/nucleo.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/nucleo-0.5-1.src.rpm *** NOTE *** You may have to download the src.rpm from: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/ This spec file is a complete rewrite from scratch. I would like to take over ownership of this package. -- 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 183912] Review Request: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit
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: jack-audio-connection-kit - The Jack Audio Connection Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=183912 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 16:33 EST --- I agree with the review of comment 38. Apply for cvsextras in the account system, I'll sponsor. -- 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 174325] Review Request: mod_spin Apache module
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: mod_spin Apache module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174325 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] CC|fedora-package- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-extras- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis|| -- 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 192568] New: Review Request: perl-File-Type
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192568 Summary: Review Request: perl-File-Type Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-File-Type/perl-File-Type.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-File-Type-0.22-1.src.rpm Description: File::Type uses magic numbers (typically at the start of a file) to determine the MIME type of that file. -- 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 192475] Review Request: perl-PadWalker - Play with other peoples' lexical variables
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-PadWalker - Play with other peoples' lexical variables https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192475 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 16:42 EST --- * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. It's not included separately in the package, but this is not necessary as the upstream tarball does not include it. * source files match upstream: 05d684ce2f17ef4f058ec2e912b5f95c PadWalker-1.0.tar.gz 05d684ce2f17ef4f058ec2e912b5f95c PadWalker-1.0.tar.gz-srpm * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: PadWalker.so()(64bit) perl(PadWalker) = 1.0 perl-PadWalker = 1.0-1.fc6 - libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) perl = 0:5.008 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Exporter) perl(strict) perl(vars) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 * shared libraries are present, but internal to Perl so no need to call ldconfig. * package is not relocatable. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * %clean is present. * %check is present and all tests pass: All tests successful. Files=9, Tests=65, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.11 cusr + 0.07 csys = 0.18 CPU) * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no libtool .la droppings. * not a GUI app. 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 192571] New: Review Request: perl-IO-Null
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192571 Summary: Review Request: perl-IO-Null Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-IO-Null/perl-IO-Null.spec SRPM URL: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-IO-Null-1.01-1.src.rpm Description: IO::Null is a class for null filehandles. Calling a constructor of this class always succeeds, returning a new null filehandle. Writing to any object of this class is always a no-operation, and returns true. Reading from any object of this class is always no-operation, and returns empty-string or empty-list, as appropriate. -- 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 169703] Review Request: pari - Number Theory-oriented Computer Algebra 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: pari - Number Theory-oriented Computer Algebra System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=169703 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 17:02 EST --- (In reply to comment #21) In FC5 mock, I get: dvips -t landscape -t a4 refcard.dvi -o refcard.ps make[2]: dvips: Command not found make[2]: *** [refcard.ps] Error 127 Looks like a needed BR on tetex-dvips. Ok added. I ended up dropping the --host= line altogether and patching the Makefile to correctly build the shared library. SRPM here: What is difference to the situation before we used --host=none? It then already built fine, the problem was were the non-pic libraries, and, as you say, this is still the case. (See also comment #5) -- 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 192575] Review Request: perl-Pipeline
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-Pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192575 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||192571, 192574 -- 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 192574] Review Request: perl-Data-Structure-Util
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-Data-Structure-Util https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192574 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||192575 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 192571] Review Request: perl-IO-Null
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-IO-Null https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192571 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||192575 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 189088] Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet.
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: knemo Network monitor applet. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189088 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 17:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) Oh my god, I shouldn't have done this, but... Indeed you shouldn't. As said I think its great you want to create more packages for Fedora. I also understand that you've put time and energy into sparse and thus don't want to just walk away just because somebodyelse is also working on it*. But you can't just hijack thihs package let alone this review request. Please try to contact Richard June ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and work together with him on this. You could do a comaintainer ship: Merge your 2 specfiles using the best parts of both. Then one of you imports it into cvs and becomes the owner as specified in owners.list, the others bugzilla email gets put in the initial-CC field of owners.list, so that he gets all bugzilla mail related to the package 2, then you can coordinate bugfixes for Bz bugs through BZ and other bugfixes / new releases through private mail. * been there done that myself, search the f-e-l mailing list archives on monkey-bubble -- 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 192577] Review Request: perl-OpenFrame
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-OpenFrame https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192577 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||192568, 192575 -- 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 192575] Review Request: perl-Pipeline
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-Pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192575 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||192577 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 192568] Review Request: perl-File-Type
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-File-Type https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192568 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||192577 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 189088] Review Request: knemo Network monitor applet.
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: knemo Network monitor applet. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189088 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 18:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) Oh my god, I shouldn't have done this, but... Indeed you shouldn't. As said I think its great you want to create more packages for Fedora. I also understand that you've put time and energy into sparse and thus don't want to just walk away just because somebodyelse is also working on it*. But you can't just hijack thihs package let alone this review request. I'm not trying to overtake the package. Like I said in the other bug, I made a mistake and recognized that. But as I am exercising my package work, I made my last available SPECS and SRPMS for the maintainer (Richard June) to use it (I already did it before Aurelien duplicated my bug). Since my spec conforms with many things noted by the reviewer, he can use it freely to learn and get this package available in Extras on short-time. Please try to contact Richard June ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) and work together with him on this. I sent an e-mail to him early talking about this, asking him if he still wants to maintain the package, and pointing my work so that if he wants to maintain, he can use a more-correct specfile ;) You could do a comaintainer ship: Merge your 2 specfiles using the best parts of both. Then one of you imports it into cvs and becomes the owner as specified in owners.list, the others bugzilla email gets put in the initial-CC field of owners.list, so that he gets all bugzilla mail related to the package 2, then you can coordinate bugfixes for Bz bugs through BZ and other bugfixes / new releases through private mail. It is a great idea, but if he wants to maintain the package and use my specfile, he can do it and I will not want any credits for it :P Just think of it as a replacement for my mistake (not looking in FE-NEW bug). I'll wait an answer from him, and one more time: I am very sorry about this issue! This won't happen again. -- 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 192568] Review Request: perl-File-Type
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-File-Type https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192568 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 192578] New: Review Request: metamonitor - A Simple program that watches log files and popup its changes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192578 Summary: Review Request: metamonitor - A Simple program that watches log files and popup its changes Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/metamonitor.spec SRPM URL: http://www.devin.com.br/eitch/rpm/fedora/5/SRPMS/metamonitor-0.4.5-1.src.rpm Description: metamonitor is a simple program written for KDE, which watches the syslog's or metalog's log file and pops up the window whenever the new message comes. You can specify the file to watch and a regular expression for parsing the log line, so you can watch other than log files 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 192575] Review Request: perl-Pipeline
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-Pipeline https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192575 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||192564 -- 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 192564] Review Request: uuid
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: uuid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192564 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||192575 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 187621] Review Request: blam
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: blam https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187621 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 19:49 EST --- I changed configure.in to look for gecko-sharp2 and gtk-sharp2, and also removed the .a, .la, and .so files. The result: http://fedorared.org/~john/review/blam-1.8.2-2.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 192311] Review Request: cobbler
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: cobbler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192311 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 21:01 EST --- rpmlint: E: cobbler description-line-too-long Cobbler is a command line tool for simplified configuration of boot/provisioning servers. It is also accessible as a Python library. Cobbler supports PXE, Xen, and re-provisioning an existing Linux system via auto-kickstart. The last two modes require 'koan' to be run on the remote system. Wrap at 80 characters. E: cobbler no-changelogname-tag You need a %changelog E: cobbler non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/cobbler/cobbler.py 0644 Begins with #!/usr/bin/python, ignorable. * Package is marked as relocatable, please check. (wiki: Packaging/Guidelines#RelocatablePackages) * Spec file: tag Vendor is forbidden (wiki: Packaging/Guidelines#tags) * No downloadable source. Please give the full URL in the Source tag. * The BuildRoot must be cleaned at the beginning of %install -- 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 176374] Review Request: nagios-plugins
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: nagios-plugins https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=176374 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 22:08 EST --- SPEC: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-plugins.spec SRPM: http://mmcgrath.net/~mmcgrath/nagios/nagios-plugins-1.4.3-4.src.rpm Changelog: - Now using configure macro instead of ./configure - Added BuildRequest: perl(Net::SNMP) - For reference, this was bugzilla.redhat.com ticket# 176374 -- 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 180092] Review Request: NRPE - Monitoring agent for Nagios
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: NRPE - Monitoring agent for Nagios https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=180092 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-20 22:14 EST --- Please see: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2006-April/msg01374.html -- 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
