[Bug 189268] Review Request: xscreensaver
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: xscreensaver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189268 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE OtherBugsDependingO||169107 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 02:52 EST --- Now I close this bug as CLOSED NEXTRELEASE. Okay, xscreensaver-5.00-1.fc6 was released in FE-devel. I won't release xscreensaver-5.00-1.fc5 in FE-5 because FC-5 has xscreensaver 4.24 -2. Ray, please remove xscreensaver 4.24-2 from FC-devel. Perhaps by FC6-T1, we can completely move xscreensaver from FC to FE. I thank very much to all the people for helping me a lot about 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 174866] Review Request: polypaudio: Improved Linux sound 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: polypaudio: Improved Linux sound server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=174866 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 02:53 EST --- Spec Name or Url: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/polypaudio/polypaudio.spec SRPM Name or Url: http://homes.drzeus.cx/~drzeus/polypaudio/polypaudio-0.9.0-2.src.rpm Fixed some rpmlint problems. Remaining warnings: polypaudio-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: E: polypaudio setuid-binary /usr/bin/polypaudio root 04755 E: polypaudio non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/polypaudio 04755 E: polypaudio non-executable-script /etc/polypaudio/default.pa 0644 polypaudio-devel-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: W: polypaudio-devel no-documentation polypaudio-lib-glib-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: W: polypaudio-lib-glib no-documentation polypaudio-lib-glib2-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: W: polypaudio-lib-glib2 no-documentation polypaudio-module-alsa-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: W: polypaudio-module-alsa no-documentation polypaudio-module-lirc-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: W: polypaudio-module-lirc no-documentation polypaudio-module-x11-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: W: polypaudio-module-x11 no-documentation polypaudio-utils-0.9.0-2.i386.rpm: E: polypaudio-utils invalid-soname /usr/lib/libpolypdsp.so libpolypdsp.so W: polypaudio-utils no-documentation -- 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 193531] New: Review Request: kicad - Electronic schematic diagrams and printed circuit board artwork
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=193531 Summary: Review Request: kicad - Electronic schematic diagrams and printed circuit board artwork 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://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/4/SPECS/kicad.spec SRPM URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/4/SRPMS/kicad-2006-04-24-0-3.src.rpm Description: Kicad is an open source (GPL) software for the creation of electronic schematic diagrams and printed circuit board artwork up to 16 layers. Kicad is a set of four softwares and a project manager: - Eeschema: schematic entry - Pcbnew: board editor - Gerbview: GERBER viewer (photoplotter documents) - Cvpcb: footprint selector for components used in the circuit design - Kicad: project manager -- 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 193210] Review Request: htmldoc - Convert HTML source files into HTML, PostScript, or PDF
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: htmldoc - Convert HTML source files into HTML,
PostScript, or PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193210
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 03:54 EST ---
Ah, that's true, I didn't know. In the bug, Ray said the fix will be backported
to FC4, so I think you can leave out the Requires entirely.
I found a small bug: if you start the graphical frontend, and click on the
"help" button, you have an error, it can't find the doc. The path is hardcoded
in the configure script, line 5916.
Since the new path depends on the version number, you have two options:
- make a patch to change this line, and update it with each new version
- change the line with a sed call in %prep, where maros such as %{version} are
available
I would choose the 2nd option, because it is less likely to cause errors in the
future (I know *I* would forget to update the patch at least once). But make
sure the regexp is sufficiently specific, this is a large 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 190243] Review Request: scim-bridge (gtkimm module in C)
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: scim-bridge (gtkimm module in C) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 03:54 EST --- Thanks. FE devel packages built, branches requested, and added to owners list. -- 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 05:07 EST --- Imported and built. Closing. Thanks! -- 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 193103] Review Request: Listen
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: Listen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193103 Bug 193103 depends on bug 192490, which changed state. Bug 192490 Summary: Review Request: python-ogg - A Python wrapper for the Ogg libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192490 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 192491] Review Request: python-vorbis - A Python wrapper for the Ogg Vorbis audio 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-vorbis - A Python wrapper for the Ogg Vorbis audio libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192491 Bug 192491 depends on bug 192490, which changed state. Bug 192490 Summary: Review Request: python-ogg - A Python wrapper for the Ogg libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192490 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 168690] Review Request: pyBackPack (GTK+ Python backup 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: pyBackPack (GTK+ Python backup tool) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168690 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 05:40 EST --- I didn't apply for SoC 2006 and nobody has picked up pyBackPack's development - consider it dead. -- 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 168719] Review Request: gdal
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: gdal https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=168719 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 06:06 EST --- Ignacio, are you still reviewing this review request? I think this PR has exceeded all reasonable limits and should be closed now. -- 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 187430] Review Request: elektra
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: elektra
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187430
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 06:18 EST ---
> I did this on spec:
> rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_lib}/libelektra.so
> ln -sf ../../%{_lib}/libelektra.so.2 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/libelektra.so
>
> Any suggestion for a cleaner way without hardcoding the lib version ?
ln -sf ../../%{_lib}/libelektra.so.? $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/libelektra.so
> Most warnings are due to some bug in the build system claiming "warning:
> implicit declaration of function 'usleep'". They are sort of fake, and will
> be
> fixed.
Wha do you mean by "They are sort of fake"? I had a look at the code, and
indeed in keyset.c usleep is used although there is no
#include
(maybe conditionalized on HAVE_UNISTD_H, with AC_CHECK_HEADERS(unistd.h))
As a side note, in case you weren't aware, in the usleep man page,
there is:
This function is obsolete. Use nanosleep(2) or setitimer(2) instead.
Anyway I don't have any other comments. I believe the package is in shape
now, so now you should look for a sponsor who accepts the dlopened libs
in /lib and the header files directly in /usr/include... Or be prepared to
fix those issues.
To look for a sponsor, the best is to show that you have enough knowledge
of the packaging guidelines to have CVS access granted to you, and
the best for that is to participate in other packages reviews, by
comenting and sending patches for specfiles.
--
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 187282] Review Request: sax2
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: sax2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187282 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://sax.berlios.de --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 06:23 EST --- yes readline is required. I added the package to the BuildRequires. If you don't mind try again: ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/sax/review/sax2-8.1-70.src.rpm I was able to build it on my test machine with FC5 installed. Packages can be found on berlios ftp as well. Thanks for your effort I'm hopping you will be successful the next time -- 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 193103] Review Request: Listen
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: Listen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193103 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 06:24 EST --- I just imported python-ogg and python-vorbis. Now it can have the proper dependencies satisfied. -- 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 192491] Review Request: python-vorbis - A Python wrapper for the Ogg Vorbis audio 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-vorbis - A Python wrapper for the Ogg Vorbis audio libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192491 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 06:24 EST --- Package Imported and built. Closing. Thanks! -- 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 193103] Review Request: Listen
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: Listen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193103 Bug 193103 depends on bug 192491, which changed state. Bug 192491 Summary: Review Request: python-vorbis - A Python wrapper for the Ogg Vorbis audio libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192491 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 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] 2006-05-30 06:35 EST --- Thanks Rex! I followed the tips in your review and created a new release. It is now imported and built. Closing. Thanks Aurelien and all. As I realized this too late, I imported and built (with Comment #14 changes) before getting into FE-ACCEPT again (as in Comment #13). I hope a final review returns good :-) And sorry for my little mistake. Package updated: 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-0.4.0-4.src.rpm Changes: - Created BuildRequires for the ifconfig and iwconfig commands, as knemo utilizes it for monitoring. - Removed addition of categories in desktop-file-install command -- 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 OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 07:30 EST --- The changes are OK, 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 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] 2006-05-30 07:38 EST --- Ok, as I am not the original reporter of this bug, who can close it with resolution NEXTRELEASE? I can't. -- 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 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED 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 187243] Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc)
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: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187243 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 08:36 EST --- Upstream has released version 0.9.16. Should I update the package, or are some people busy reviewing 0.9.14, who won't like to do their work over 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 191016] Review Request: svn-client-adapter
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: svn-client-adapter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191016 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 08:42 EST --- see comment #1 -- 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 191017] Review Request: subclipse
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: subclipse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191017 Bug 191017 depends on bug 191016, which changed state. Bug 191016 Summary: Review Request: svn-client-adapter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191016 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |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 193224] Review Request: streamer
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: streamer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193224 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 09:11 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) > I didnt get what u mean by > >Thanks. What appears to have happened now is that upstream (you) have > >released a > >new tarball at version 1.1 that contains the GPL file, which was not the case > >with the version 1.1 tarball I last looked at. *Please* don't release new > >tarballs with the same version numbers as previous releases - that's a really > >bad habit to get into. OK, I'll give examples. In your original bugzilla submission for this package you posted a URL for streamer-1.1-2.fc5.src.rpm. This SRPM contains a tarball streamer-1.1.tar.bz2. In Comment #7 you posted a URL for streamer-1.1-3.fc5.src.rpm, another SRPM, which also contains a tarball streamer-1.1.tar.bz2. However, this was different from the previous tarball of the same name because it contained an additional file, "GPL". In Comment #9 you reposted the same URL as in Comment #7, but now the SRPM at that URL contains yet another version of streamer-1.1.tar.bz2 that is different from the previous two releases. So if I refer in my review to a problem with the streamer version 1.1 release, what am I actually referring to? There are to my knowledge at least three different things that could be described as streamer version 1.1. This is terribly confusing. To avoid this confusion, follow these rules of thumb: 1. If you change the contents of a tarball, no matter how minor the change, the version number of that tarball (and hence the package containing it as well) should be increased. 2. If you change any other aspect of the package, such as a spec file, adding or changing a patch etc., the release number of the package should be increased. This ensures that there is never a case where there are two different packages with the same name but different contents. > Also i solved rpmbuild "file included twice" warnings and some other > warnings. Yes, that's good. > Other signedness warnings are ok as they are compiler specific. Same warnings > are not coming on FC4 and RHEL systems. You'll need to build on FC5 or later to see some of these warnings. The ones I was most concerned about are still there: CC console/capture.o console/capture.c: In function 'ng_grabber_setformat': console/capture.c:183: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 1 of 'ng_ratio_fixup' differ in signedness console/capture.c:183: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 2 of 'ng_ratio_fixup' differ in signedness console/capture.c: In function 'movie_writer_stop': console/capture.c:528: warning: integer constant is too large for 'long' type console/capture.c:533: warning: integer constant is too large for 'long' type console/capture.c: In function 'movie_print_timestamps': console/capture.c:588: warning: integer constant is too large for 'long' type console/capture.c:588: warning: integer constant is too large for 'long' type console/capture.c: In function 'movie_grab_put_video': console/capture.c:624: warning: integer constant is too large for 'long' type >Do i need to update to new release number. if yes why?? i only solved > warnings not added any feature. The package has changed. It's a new release, different from the previous one. The release number should be increased and there should be a changelog entry describing the changes (note: the changelog in the RPM spec describes the changes to the packaging rather than the changes to the application itself - changes to the application are normally described in a changelog file in the application's tarball). -- 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 191922] Review Request: dbus-qt: Qt-based library for using D-BUS
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: dbus-qt: Qt-based library for using D-BUS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 09:34 EST --- %changelog * Tue May 30 2006 Rex Dieter - Requires: dbus = %%version FC-5: Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/dbus-qt-0.61.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/dbus-qt-0.61-3.src.rpm FC-4: Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/dbus-qt-0.33.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/dbus-qt-0.33-6.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 191016] Review Request: svn-client-adapter
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: svn-client-adapter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191016 [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 175282] Review Request: apollon: Filesharing client
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: apollon: Filesharing client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175282 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|fedora-extras- | |[EMAIL PROTECTED] | CC||fedora-package- ||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug 175282 depends on bug 170602, which changed state. Bug 170602 Summary: kdelibs: cleanup .la files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170602 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution|RAWHIDE | Status|CLOSED |NEW -- 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 191922] Review Request: dbus-qt: Qt-based library for using D-BUS
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: dbus-qt: Qt-based library for using D-BUS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191922 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 09:50 EST --- APPROVED Please correct the spec file names when you import they MUST be dbus-qt.spec -- 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] 2006-05-30 10:18 EST --- New repository because there was no enough disk space on the first place. Spec URL: http://fedoraxgl.tuxfamily.org/repository/5/SPECS/compiz.spec SRPM URL: http://fedoraxgl.tuxfamily.org/repository/5/SRPMS/compiz-1.0.0-4.src.rpm For building compiz, the control-center-devel package with 2.14.0 is requiered. Pre made package are avalable here: SRPM: http://fedoraxgl.tuxfamily.org/repository/5/SRPMS/control-center-2.14.0-1.src.rpm Spec: http://fedoraxgl.tuxfamily.org/repository/5/SPECS/control-center.spec -- 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 193479] Review Request: xwrits
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: xwrits
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193479
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 10:20 EST ---
Tested building the SRPM with %{?_smp_mflags} and it seems to work correctly. I
also made a slight change to the .desktop file to make it so that it runs xwrits
with some more options.
--
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 192889] Review Request: openais standards based cluster framework
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: openais standards based cluster framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192889
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 11:17 EST ---
"man openais_overview" mentions adding a user "ais" to the system. Shouldn't the
package be doing that?
Would it be approriate to do a "/sbin/service openais condrestart" in %post to
restart the service if it's running when the main package is upgraded?
Directory ownership looks OK to me now.
I think %{_libdir}/openais/lib*.so.* should be in the main package, and only
%{_libdir}/openais/lib*.so should be in the devel package. This would be
consistent with other packages. If the libs are only needed for the devel
package, then the /etc/ld.so.conf.d/openais-*.conf file should be in the devel
package and the scriptlet calls of ldconfig should be in the devel package too.
--
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] 2006-05-30 11:58 EST --- I just yum installed jack-audio-connection-kit from extras-development. Congratulations and thank you! Are you planning on putting it in the FC-5 branch as well? Thanks! -- 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 175282] Review Request: apollon: Filesharing client
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: apollon: Filesharing client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175282 Bug 175282 depends on bug 170602, which changed state. Bug 170602 Summary: kdelibs: cleanup .la files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170602 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- 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 190101] Review Request: php-pear-Log
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-Log https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190101 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 12:13 EST --- Spec URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Log.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Log-1.9.6-1.fc5.src.rpm Mock build log : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pear-Log-build.log - update to 1.9.6 - install Licence in prep -- 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 192413] libdhcp : IPv6 and IPv4 DHCP client and network configuration library API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: libdhcp : IPv6 and IPv4 DHCP client and network configuration library
API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192413
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 13:46 EST ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> RE:
> > Looking at /usr/include/dhcp4client/isc-dhcp/dhcp4client.h and then the one
> > for IPv6, I only see one function prototype and it looks like an entry point
> > for execing the client daemon to me.
>
> Each libdhcp{4,6}client library provides only one entry point, which is the
> client main() function renamed to dhcpv{4,6}_client . The main functions
> have been modifed not to go into daemon mode, fork any processes etc., or
> to create any files at all, if running under libdhcp, and also to clean up
> after themselves - before returning, they free all memory used by the
> client and reintialize all the global variables used by the client.
> I've tested running both the clients 100 times in succession in the same
> process under valgrind and valgrind reports no leaked files, memory or
> memory access errors from client code.
OK, then this is probably why I thought it was execing the client. It's not
doing that, but rather it is the client code (minus some daemon housekeeping).
I'm all for code reuse, but the libdhcp{4,6}client + libdhcp solution is simply
too big for loader2. Loader2 is static and needs to fit in tight spaces.
I also have questions about these new client libraries for DHCP. It's just
duplicating the client code in the form of the library, right? Having two
copies of large programs, one as a client and one as a library, opens the door
to more maintenance issues...at least down the road. Are these libraries
something you want to send upstream to ISC and then patch the clients to use
them? This really has no bearing on its use in anaconda, but it's a concern I
have.
A drop-in replacement for pump now helps, but it pulls in libdhcp{4,6}client and
libdhcp, which doesn't help loader2.
Pump doesn't need to be a client, we just need the library. I think this is the
way to go for loader2 in anaconda. We need a minimal IPv4 and IPv6 library that
can link in to loader2. It only needs to be there for bringing up the network
interface so we can grab stage2 and make it go. It's hard to define minimal,
but there are certainly things in dhclient (and the one for IPv6) that just
don't matter for the installer.
--
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 192413] libdhcp : IPv6 and IPv4 DHCP client and network configuration library API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: libdhcp : IPv6 and IPv4 DHCP client and network configuration library
API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192413
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 14:23 EST ---
Please define "too big" - the libraries used by libdhcp are quite small:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 761964 May 30 12:11 /usr/lib/libdhcp4client.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 253272 May 26 13:19 /usr/lib/libdhcp6client.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 118898 May 30 12:20 /usr/lib/libdhcp.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 345150 May 26 20:13 /usr/lib/libnl.a
= a total size of 1479284 bytes.
This is quite small compared to the libc.a already linked in to loader2:
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2667018 May 24 04:39 /usr/lib/libc.a
How small does loader2 have to be ? Have you tried using libdhcp and found
it to be too big ? What is the actual size limitation of loader2 ?
The libdhcp* footprint would be MUCH smaller if libdhcp could simply
execute the dhcp client binaries in separate processes, and use IPC
to obtain the DHCP parameters, but I was told that this was not an
option and that a library implementation was required.
libdhcp could also be MUCH smaller if loader2 could use shared libs -
why can't it ?
RE:
> there are certainly things in dhclient (and the one for IPv6) that just
> don't matter for the installer.
Which things ?
Everything in dhclient and dhcpv6 is required, depending on configuration
settings.
RE:
> Pump doesn't need to be a client, we just need the library
How would you intend to obtain DHCP parameters from a DHCP server without
implementing the DHCP client protocol ?
RE:
> We need a minimal IPv4 and IPv6 library that can link in to loader2.
That is what libdhcp and libdhcp{4,6}client provide.
Either we use the ISC dhclient and DHCPv6 code for anaconda, giving users a
full featured and configurable DHCP client that they already know how to
configure, and allowing us to re-use the code from the FC clients, or we
write our own DHCPv4 and DHCPv6 clients for anaconda from scratch.
I can undertake to write DHCP and DHCPv4 clients from scratch if desired,
but it seems to me to be the wrong way to go when we already have tried and
tested DHCP client code that users are familiar with and know how to configure.
Please at least give libdhcp a try - if we come across any obstacles, I can
resolve them.
--
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] 2006-05-30 15:12 EST --- Anthony, I've put request to wiki already. I'm wating to answer now. Please, keep track the events there. -- 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 187243] Review Request: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc)
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: lazarus : IDE and RAD tool for the free pascal compiler (fpc) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187243 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 15:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) > Upstream has released version 0.9.16. Should I update the package, or are some > people busy reviewing 0.9.14, who won't like to do their work over again? Please update. Reviewing the latest version is preferred. -- 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 193584] New: Review Request: nucleo - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video
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=193584 Summary: Review Request: nucleo - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video 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/nucleo.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/nucleo-0.5-2.src.rpm Description: Nucleo is a toolkit for exploring new uses of video and new human-computer interaction techniques. This should obsolete bug #177081 -- 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] 2006-05-30 15:35 EST --- new bugzilla entry created bug #193584 -- 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 192603] Review Request: openalpp - Object Oriented version of OpenAL
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: openalpp - Object Oriented version of OpenAL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192603 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 15:48 EST --- Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/openalpp.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/openalpp-20060405-3.src.rpm %changelog * Tue May 30 2006 Christopher Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 20060405-3 - Fix Group - Fix patch number The debian guys added that patch to the spec file, I'm not sure why they chose 3330, I've changed it back to just patch0. Group has also been fixed. Thanks for the review! I'm not sure if you noticed, but I did approve the xgalaga package a week ago. -- 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 191667] Review Request: poker-engine - Python library that implements poker rules
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: poker-engine - Python library that implements poker rules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191667 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 16:03 EST --- Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/poker-engine.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/poker-engine-1.0.15-1.src.rpm %changelog * Tue May 30 2006 Christopher Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 1.0.15-1 - Upstream sync - Add rsync to Requires - Remove patches and autoreconf since these have been fixed in new release I've updated this to the 1.0.15 release which no longer requires the patches to be installed and no longer requires the autoreconf. I also added rsync to the Requires. Thanks for 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 191667] Review Request: poker-engine - Python library that implements poker rules
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: poker-engine - Python library that implements poker rules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191667 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 16:05 EST --- Oh, and the xml files in /usr/share are supposed to be "reference" files while the ones in /etc are editable. -- 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 191545] Review Request: perl-Net-Jabber
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-Net-Jabber https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191545 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 16:22 EST --- Updated. Also included perl(Time::Timezone) as a requires, as its presence enables additional functionality in Net::Jabber, and the autoreq scripts don't pick it up. Spec URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Net-Jabber.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Net-Jabber-2.0-5.fc5.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 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform 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: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 16:28 EST --- Review for release 1: * RPM name is OK * Source blobwars_1.05.orig.tar.gz is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint looks OK * File list looks OK * Works fine, including sound -- 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] 2006-05-30 17:24 EST --- Fixed jack-dssi-host for x86-64 hosts... Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/dssi.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/dssi-0.9.1-5.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 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] 2006-05-30 17:39 EST --- Thanks for the review. Upstream is hinting at version 0.11.0 being released next week, so I will wait until that is out before updating the spec. -- 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 193478] Review Request: wordpress - database driven blogging software
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: wordpress - database driven blogging software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193478 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 17:49 EST --- Direct static code injection vulnerability in WordPress 2.0.2 and earlier: http://nvd.nist.gov/nvd.cfm?cvename=CVE-2006-2667 -- 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 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform 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: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 [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 193584] Review Request: nucleo - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video
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 - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] BugsThisDependsOn||177081 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 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||193584 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 193584] Review Request: nucleo - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video
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 - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 18:51 EST --- - Spec files followed the Packaging Guideline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines and the Package Naming Guideline http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines - sha1sum and md5sum from SRPM match the source package from the original website : http://insitu.lri.fr/~chapuis/software/metisse/ - The built package passed the rpmlint check - The license from the package is LGPL - In accordance, the spec and srpms passed the review and should be added in the cvs 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 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 18:56 EST --- Bug closed. Obsoloted by #193584 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 193584 *** -- 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 193584] Review Request: nucleo - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video
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 - Toolkit for exploring new uses of video https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Bug 193584 depends on bug 177081, which changed state. Bug 177081 Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||DUPLICATE Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |CLOSED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 18:57 EST --- *** Bug 177081 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 177080] Review Request: metisse
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: metisse https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177080 Bug 177080 depends on bug 177081, which changed state. Bug 177081 Summary: Review Request: nucleo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177081 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||DUPLICATE Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |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 189884] Review Request: LASH Audio Session Handler
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: LASH Audio Session Handler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189884 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 19:13 EST --- I believe all this is fixed, and more. Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/lash.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/green/FE/FC5/lash-0.5.1-2.src.rpm Thanks! -- 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 191667] Review Request: poker-engine - Python library that implements poker rules
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: poker-engine - Python library that implements poker rules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191667 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 19:13 EST --- * Source still matches upstream. new md5sum: 5b51616881d0ee10354b0f5f573a52d1 poker-engine-1.0.15.tar.gz * rpmlint output unchanged from before * Still builds in mock on FC4, FC5 (devel not retested) 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 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform 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: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 19:23 EST ---
* rpmlint output clean
* Package named according to Package Naming Guidelines
* spec file name matches package %{name}
* Package meets Packaging Guidelines
* Licensed with open source compatible license
* License field in spec file matches actual license
* License text included in %doc
* spec file written in American English
* spec file is legible
* Sources match upstream
72b259abb6ec83a77f3c76052de24e50 blobwars_1.05.orig.tar.gz
* Package successfully compiles and builds on x86_64 FC-5
* All dependencies are specified in BuildRequires
- SDL-devel and ImageMagick are extraneous BR
* Spec file does not include any locales
* Package does not include any shared libraries
* Package is not relocatable
* Package owns all directories it creates
* Package does not contain duplicate files in %files
* File permissions are set appropriately
* Package contains a proper %clean section
* Macro usage is consistant
* Package contains permissible content
* Package does not contain large documentation to warrent a -doc subpackage
* Package does not contain any header files, static libraries or .pc files
* Package does not include any library files needed for a -devel subpackage
* Package does not contain any .la files
* Package includes a proper .desktop file
* Package does not own any files or directories owned by other packages
=== MUST FIX
* MUST remove extreanous BR SDL-devel and ImageMagick
* MUST remove extreanous "export" in %build section
* MUST remove extreanous "-n %{name}-%{version}" under %setup
=== SHOULD ===
* Please explain to me why you use patch -z, most examples I've seen use patch
-b and I don't understand the differences between these two options. I'm not
asking you to use -b, but just explain to me why you use -z. Thanks!
--
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 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform 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: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 19:46 EST --- Additional comment (SHOULD FIX): /var/tmp/blobwars-1.05-1-root-mockbuild/usr/share/applications/fedora-blobwars.desktop: warning: boolean key "Terminal" has value "0", boolean values should be "false" or "true", although "0" and "1" are allowed in this field for backwards compatibility -- 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 192060] Review Request: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform 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: blobwars - Mission and Objective based 2D Platform Game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192060 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 19:48 EST --- NOTE SHOULD FIX: If you are planning on fixing the .desktop file, I will also recommend you call the game "Blob Wars: Metal Blob Solid" instead of just "Metal Blob Solid". This will make it easier to locate and will be easier when Part II is released. -- 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 193478] Review Request: wordpress - database driven blogging software
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: wordpress - database driven blogging software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193478 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-05-30 20:35 EST --- Well, there doesn't appear to be a patch available, so this review will have to wait until there is one. I'm watching the svn and testers lists upstream. -- 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] 2006-05-31 01:36 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > For building compiz, the control-center-devel package with 2.14.0 is > requiered. > Pre made package are avalable [...] This is going to be a problem -- control-center is already in Core and Extras packages are not allowed to replace packages from Core. The proper way to solve this kind of problem in Fedora-Land would be to convince the core maintainer to release a update that also builds the devel package. That's probably not that easy, but you should at least try (e.g. create a patch for the control-center.spec from Core, open a bug here, describe the situation and attach the patch to the 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
