[Bug 197194] New: Review Request: perl-Regexp-Shellish - Shell-like regular expressions
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=197194 Summary: Review Request: perl-Regexp-Shellish - Shell-like regular expressions 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://znark.com/fedora/perl-Regexp-Shellish.spec SRPM URL: http://znark.com/fedora/perl-Regexp-Shellish-0.93-2.src.rpm Description: Provides shell-like regular expressions. Another dependency of perl-SVK. -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:18 EST --- Created an attachment (id=131715) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=131715action=view) kmenu-gnome.spec without dangerous commands in %post and %preun -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:21 EST --- Created an attachment (id=131716) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=131716action=view) kmenu-gnome-0.5.1-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197194] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Shellish - Shell-like regular expressions
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-Regexp-Shellish - Shell-like regular expressions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:29 EST --- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:30 EST --- Uploaded new spec. It no longer fixes bug #196275 - it only hides it using a Fedora-specific additional merge file. While fixing a bug is preferable to hiding it, I accept the criticism that %post is not the best place for patches. The symlinks are moved under %install so they all are owned by the package. rpmlint warns about symbolic links pointing nowhere but that's normal: http://qa.mandriva.com/twiki/bin/view/Main/PackagingProblems#RpmLint_Warnings -- 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:38 EST --- A change in the subversion bindings generated by new swig version broke SVK. The Debian bug, http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=356894, has lots of detail and a patch for SVN::Mirror. I applied the patch and that fixed the problem on rawhide. -- 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 196793] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer
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-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer Alias: php-pear-MDB2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196793 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:40 EST --- ah nevermind, the license is at the top of the source files, so it is already included in every file. I can cutpaste one of these text files for the license. -- 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 196617] Review Request: perl-File-chdir - Perl module for local chdir()
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-chdir - Perl module for local chdir() https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196617 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:42 EST --- Added and built for devel. -- 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 196627] Review Request: perl-SVN-Mirror - Mirror remote repository to local Subversion repository
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-SVN-Mirror - Mirror remote repository to local Subversion repository https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196627 Bug 196627 depends on bug 196617, which changed state. Bug 196617 Summary: Review Request: perl-File-chdir - Perl module for local chdir() https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196617 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 Bug 196629 depends on bug 196619, which changed state. Bug 196619 Summary: Review Request: perl-Data-Hierarchy - Handle data in a hierarchical structure https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196619 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 196619] Review Request: perl-Data-Hierarchy - Handle data in a hierarchical structure
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-Hierarchy - Handle data in a hierarchical structure https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196619 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:43 EST --- Added and built for devel. -- 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 196620] Review Request: perl-Algorithm-Annotate - represent a series of changes in annotate form
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-Algorithm-Annotate - represent a series of changes in annotate form https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196620 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:44 EST --- Built for devel. -- 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 Bug 196629 depends on bug 196620, which changed state. Bug 196620 Summary: Review Request: perl-Algorithm-Annotate - represent a series of changes in annotate form https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196620 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 196622] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-eol - PerlIO layer for normalizing line endings
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-PerlIO-eol - PerlIO layer for normalizing line endings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196622 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:44 EST --- Built for devel. -- 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 196623] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-via-dynamic - dynamic PerlIO layers
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-PerlIO-via-dynamic - dynamic PerlIO layers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196623 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:44 EST --- Built for devel. -- 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 196624] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-via-symlink - PerlIO layers for creating symlinks
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-PerlIO-via-symlink - PerlIO layers for creating symlinks https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196624 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:45 EST --- Built for devel. -- 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 Bug 196629 depends on bug 196623, which changed state. Bug 196623 Summary: Review Request: perl-PerlIO-via-dynamic - dynamic PerlIO layers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196623 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 196625] Review Request: perl-SVN-Simple - a simple interface to subversion's editor 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: perl-SVN-Simple - a simple interface to subversion's editor interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196625 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:45 EST --- Built for devel. -- 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 196627] Review Request: perl-SVN-Mirror - Mirror remote repository to local Subversion repository
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-SVN-Mirror - Mirror remote repository to local Subversion repository https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196627 Bug 196627 depends on bug 196625, which changed state. Bug 196625 Summary: Review Request: perl-SVN-Simple - a simple interface to subversion's editor interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196625 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 Bug 196629 depends on bug 196623, which changed state. Bug 196623 Summary: Review Request: perl-PerlIO-via-dynamic - dynamic PerlIO layers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196623 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Bug 196629 depends on bug 196624, which changed state. Bug 196624 Summary: Review Request: perl-PerlIO-via-symlink - PerlIO layers for creating symlinks https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196624 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 196621] Review Request: perl-IO-Digest - Perl module to calculate digests while reading or writing
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-Digest - Perl module to calculate digests while reading or writing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196621 Bug 196621 depends on bug 196623, which changed state. Bug 196623 Summary: Review Request: perl-PerlIO-via-dynamic - dynamic PerlIO layers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196623 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 Bug 196629 depends on bug 196622, which changed state. Bug 196622 Summary: Review Request: perl-PerlIO-eol - PerlIO layer for normalizing line endings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196622 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||197194 -- 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 197194] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Shellish - Shell-like regular expressions
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-Regexp-Shellish - Shell-like regular expressions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197194 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||196629 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 196793] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer
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-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer Alias: php-pear-MDB2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196793 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:53 EST --- Spec URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-MDB2.spec SRPM URL: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-MDB2-2.1.0-2.src.rpm %changelog * Wed Jun 28 2006 Christopher Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.1.0-2 - Remove %%build section since it is not used - Add LICENSE to %%doc -- 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 196621] Review Request: perl-IO-Digest - Perl module to calculate digests while reading or writing
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-Digest - Perl module to calculate digests while reading or writing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196621 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 02:54 EST --- Built for devel. -- 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 196629] Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-SVK - A Distributed Version Control System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196629 Bug 196629 depends on bug 196621, which changed state. Bug 196621 Summary: Review Request: perl-IO-Digest - Perl module to calculate digests while reading or writing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196621 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 197198] New: Review Request: ntop
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=197198 Summary: Review Request: ntop 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.knox.net.nz/~michael/ntop.spec SRPM URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/ntop-3.2-2.src.rpm Description: ntop is a network and traffic analyzer that provides a wealth of information on various networking hosts and protocols. ntop is primarily accessed via a built-in web interface. Optionally, data may be stored into a database for analysis or extracted from the web server in formats suitable for manipulation in perl or php. -- 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 197198] Review Request: ntop
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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 03:02 EST --- to save some time and maybe some help :) rpmlint output: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ rpmlint /home/mjk/rpmbuild/RPMS/i386/ntop-3.2-2.i386.rpm W: ntop conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/ntop/etter.finger.os.gz W: ntop conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/ntop/ntop-cert.pem W: ntop conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/ntop/oui.txt.gz W: ntop conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/ntop/p2c.opt.table.gz W: ntop conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/ntop/specialMAC.txt.gz W: ntop conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/rc.d/init.d/ntop W: ntop wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/ntop-3.2/RedHat-rpmbuild-HOWTO.txt E: ntop non-standard-uid /var/ntop ntop E: ntop non-standard-gid /var/ntop nobody E: ntop non-standard-dir-perm /var/ntop 0775 W: ntop devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libntop.so W: ntop devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libmyrrd.so E: ntop non-readable /etc/ntop.conf 0600 E: ntop script-without-shellbang /usr/share/doc/ntop-3.2/ntop-autotools.pdf W: ntop devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libntopreport.so E: ntop script-without-shellbang /usr/share/ntop/html/privacyNotice.html E: ntop executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/rc.d/init.d/ntop E: ntop script-without-shellbang /usr/share/ntop/html/ntopdump.dtd E: ntop wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/ntop/html/ntopdump.dtd E: ntop executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/ntop/specialMAC.txt.gz E: ntop executable-marked-as-config-file /etc/ntop/oui.txt.gz W: ntop dangerous-command-in-%postun userdel E: ntop incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/ntop \$prog I wasn't sure if the *.so files should be split into a devel package or not. -- 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 196793] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer
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-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer Alias: php-pear-MDB2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196793 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 03:26 EST --- Hey, I have put up another version here: http://tkmame.retrogames.com/fedora-extras/php-pear-MDB2.spec The main difference is that it puts the documentation in both the Fedora standard location AND the pear standard location. The result is a much cleaner looking spec file, tell me what you think. -- 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 197198] Review Request: ntop
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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 03:38 EST --- checking for GDOME... configure: error: could not find Gdome2 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.34360 (%build) -- 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 197198] Review Request: ntop
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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 03:51 EST --- argh.. I uploaded the wrong files. Fixed. -- 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 196669] Review Request: filesystem-i18n
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: filesystem-i18n https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196669 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 03:53 EST --- I wasn't able to find any official locales list, so I simply took what is in my /usr/share/locale. Beside from this, I'm not sure wether an official locales list would contain things like [EMAIL PROTECTED], en_CA or zh_CN.GB2312. -- 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 197198] Review Request: ntop
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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 04:00 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) argh.. I uploaded the wrong files. Fixed. Please increment the release tag. -- 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 197198] Review Request: ntop
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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 04:16 EST --- As I said, the wrong files were uploaded, I had multiple copies... anyways, bumped the release. Spec URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/ntop.spec SRPM URL: http://www.knox.net.nz/~michael/ntop-3.2-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197198] Review Request: ntop
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: ntop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197198 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 04:38 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) As I said, the wrong files were uploaded, Replacing packages without release-tag make them abiguous when looking at them from remote :) -- 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 196793] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer
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-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer Alias: php-pear-MDB2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196793 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 04:53 EST --- I can't access the specfile URL at the moment to check, but note that especially if this is not a noarch package, removing the %build section (even if it's empty) is not a good idea, see bug 192422. Even if it is noarch, I'd recommend keeping it to avoid similar nasty surprises in the future. -- 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 196865] Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player
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: audacious - A GTK2 based media player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196865 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 05:06 EST --- As it happens I have an iBook myself. I'll try and reproduce 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 196793] Review Request: php-pear-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer
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-MDB2 - PEAR: Database Abstraction Layer Alias: php-pear-MDB2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196793 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 05:06 EST --- It's noarch -- 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 196007] Review Request: kdirstat
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: kdirstat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196007
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 05:07 EST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
I don't like your dependency on /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common; it might not
work the way you expect. Your library dependencies will pull in kdelibs, which
will provide that directory, so there's no need to depend on it.
I did that to solve a dangling-symlink:
W: kdirstat dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kdirstat/common
../common
The relative symbolic link points nowhere
And I was just following a similar issue i've encountered before,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193929#c15
Do you have a better solution for this ?
Technically you don't need to own /usr/share/apps/kconf_update either, because
kdelibs owns it, but most kde applications seem to own that directory so I
don't see a problem with it.
here kconf_update contains fix_move_to_trash_bin.pl and kdirstat.upd
perharps I should rather do %{_datadir}/apps/kconf_update/* instead of
%{_datadir}/apps/kconf_update
You have post and postun requirements for desktop-file-utils but you don't
call
desktop-file-install either in %post or %postun. You should just remove them.
I've dropped them.
--
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 196740] Review Request: ogre - Object-Oriented Graphics Rendering Engine
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: ogre - Object-Oriented Graphics Rendering Engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196740 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 05:45 EST --- Could you also package the samples into ogre-samples subpackage? They can serve as some kind of tests. -- 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 196740] Review Request: ogre - Object-Oriented Graphics Rendering Engine
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: ogre - Object-Oriented Graphics Rendering Engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196740 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 07:56 EST --- #6 and #7 all the cg stuff would have to be replaced with glsl. afaik ogre supports glsl (i think theres even a trivial way to convert the shaders). -- 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] 2006-06-29 09:07 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) The xgl package doesn't not build with last rawhide mesa package because rbadaptors.c, rbadaptors.h, bitset.h (there are provide in mesa 6.5 cvs HEAD) files are not present in the mesa-source package. I have many idea to resolve this problem but i ask you to have the best practice to do that. 1. Ask mesa maintainers to add these files to de current rawhide sources. 2. Make a patch to add these files to the sources, and create a new request on bugzilla. 3. Create a package (with dependencie on mesa-source) that add xgl requieres sources to the current mesa sources directory. ( i think, that's a dirty way). Cheers, Alphonse -- 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 196007] Review Request: kdirstat
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: kdirstat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196007 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 09:45 EST --- Dangling symlinks to files in packages which you depend on are fine (as long as they're relative symlinks, of course). As for the kconf_update directory, I think not owning it is cleaner but this doesn't seem to be a blocker as there is a long tradition of applications owning this directory. -- 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 196378] Review Request: kdegraphics-extras: Extras, including kuickshow
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: kdegraphics-extras: Extras, including kuickshow https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196378 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 09:50 EST --- I will review 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 196007] Review Request: kdirstat
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: kdirstat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196007 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 09:53 EST --- As for the kconf_update directory, I think not owning it is cleaner but this doesn't seem to be a blocker as there is a long tradition of applications owning this directory. IMO, apps shouldn't own this dir (including kdirstat), only core kde pkgs (and probably only kdelibs at that). If anything else does own it, it's a 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 196378] Review Request: kdegraphics-extras: Extras, including kuickshow
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: kdegraphics-extras: Extras, including kuickshow https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196378 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 09:59 EST --- Updated URLs: Spec URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/SPECS/kdegraphics-extras.spec SRPM URL: http://kde-redhat.unl.edu/apt/kde-redhat/all/SRPMS.stable/kdegraphics-extras-3.5.3-3.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 193109] Review Request: plotmm
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: plotmm https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193109 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 10:04 EST --- Sorry for the delay, I had been quite busy. Here's the new SRPM with the suggested fixes. http://darkenphoenix.free.fr/RPMS/RPMS/Extras/SRPMS/plotmm-0.1.2-4.src.rpm Anyway, I have also other packages that need to be reviewed: bugs 193108 (libsexymm C++ bindings to libsexy ), 193109 (python-sexy python bindings to libsexy), 193103 (listen yet another music player) -- 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 196865] Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player
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: audacious - A GTK2 based media player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196865 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 10:14 EST --- I'll reply to some things now, having just looked over your report. a) what exactly makes 600 a strange permission? b) if you know how to fix the rpath thing I'll be grateful for some pointers. c) do we even ship oss drivers anymore in FC? d) While configure checks for bison, it does not actually use it. The package built successfully with the minimal build root. -- 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 10:34 EST --- I received the following message from the author: Hi, I've been meaning to deal with this but I've not got around to it. The OpenFrame package is released under both the Artistic license and the GPL. When we have another release of the package I'll ensure there is a definitive license statement. Regards, James. -- 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 10:51 EST --- Excellent. I suggest including that correspondence in the package; it should be approveable after that but I've lost the context so I'll have to recheck. -- 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 196007] Review Request: kdirstat
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: kdirstat https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196007 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 10:54 EST --- Updated: Spec URL: http://beta.glwb.info/kdirstat/kdirstat.spec SRPM URL: http://beta.glwb.info/kdirstat/kdirstat-2.5.3-3.src.rpm I ignored the warning: chitlesh(i386)[0]$rpmlint -i kdirstat-2.5.3-3.i386.rpm W: kdirstat dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kdirstat/common ../common The relative symbolic link points nowhere. -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 11:29 EST --- updated: Spec URL: http://beta.glwb.info/kmenugnome/kmenu-gnome.spec SRPM URL: http://beta.glwb.info/kmenugnome/kmenu-gnome-0.5.1-2pre3.src.rpm %changelog - dropped gtk-update-icon-cache from %%post and %preun - corrected the top-level icon directory in %%post and %preun -- 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 196865] Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player
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: audacious - A GTK2 based media player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196865 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 11:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #15) Concerning the stripped tarball: I actually prefer shipping (albeit just in a SRPM) a tarball which is consistent in itself, i.e. does not need autofoomagic on behalf of a user to build (I have not patched configure itself, I patched configure.ac and let autoconf build a new one). This is actually less work than maintaining a patch against configure (at least for me). SVN makes it pretty easy to track upstream this way. As you wish, I thought you might have your own preferences for this and there are no guidelines, hence it was on the should fix 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 11:51 EST --- (In reply to comment #14) %changelog - dropped gtk-update-icon-cache from %%post and %preun Erm, why? You make changes to the icon dirs, thus the cache needs updating. -- 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 193894] Review Request: ant-contrib - A collection of tasks for Ant
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: ant-contrib - A collection of tasks for Ant
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193894
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 11:54 EST ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Hi Hans, thanks for taking the time to review this.
Here are the updated files:
http://people.redhat.com/ifoox/extras/ant-contrib.spec
http://people.redhat.com/ifoox/extras/ant-contrib-1.0-1.b2.src.rpm
These are all fixed except:
W: ant-contrib class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/java/ant-contrib-1.0b2.jar
Do you know what the problem with a Class-Path element in a jar's manifest is?
I'm not entirely sure why rpmlint is complaining here.
Nope, please ask / discuss this on f-e-l this is my first java package review.
About your fixes, they mostly look good, but:
* you now have this:
%if %{gcj_support}
if [ -x %{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db ]
then
%{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db
fi
%endif
Twice under %postun, please remove it once.
* please dont use a patch like this:
Patch3: ant-contrib-fileendings.patch
instead do : sed -i s/\r// file1 file2 on the problem files.
* You now have Release: 1.%{beta_number} that should be 0.1.%{beta_number}, so
that you can use Release: 1 for the final. (see wiki).
* These must be removed (I missed them last time):
Vendor: JPackage Project
Distribution: JPackage
These are all fixed as you described above.
As for the symlink, I'm not sure why there's a symlink from a versioned
docs directory to an unversioned one, but I decided not to remove it. I
did take out all the weirdness with %ghosting and removing the directory
and relinking.
OK.
This is done in some packages in FC and the reason is that these packages are
also built for RHEL, which currently doesn't use GCJ for java packages. It
makes
it significantly easier to maintain a single spec. Although I do agree that it
makes the spec harder to read, I think the benefit for the maintainer of
keeping
one spec file overweights that.
Thats a good reason, I've no problem with keeping gcj_support in that case.
--
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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 12:00 EST --- from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ScriptletSnippets: For KDE, just 'touch'ing the top-level icon directory is enough. Also since kmenu-gnome does not affect on gnome menus, its useless to have gtk-update-icon-cache. -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 12:04 EST --- I see, could you add a comment to explain this to the spec-file then? This is sorta in direct contradiction with the scriptlets wiki page. But I guess thats ok in this case. -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 12:12 EST --- updated: Spec URL: http://beta.glwb.info/kmenugnome/kmenu-gnome.spec SRPM URL: http://beta.glwb.info/kmenugnome/kmenu-gnome-0.5.1-3pre3.src.rpm Hans, can you do an official review taking into consideration the comment #13 ? Ariszló is the kmenu-gnome developper. -- 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 196003] Review Request: Kmenu-gnome
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: Kmenu-gnome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196003 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 12:18 EST --- Nope, Sorry Chitlesh, but I'm both rather busy and not a KDE user and this package looks like it needs a thorough review preferably by someone intimate with KDE. Rex, maybe this is something for you? -- 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 193071] Review Request: ruby-sqlite3
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: ruby-sqlite3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193071 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 14:28 EST --- Ther Ruby guidelines are ratified now; taking this for review (probably a bit later today). -- 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 190007] Review Request: php-pecl-zip
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-pecl-zip Alias: php-pecl-zip https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190007 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 14:44 EST --- I don't see any use of re2c in the makefile. Probably come from a generic pecl configure. Here is new spec : SPEC : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pecl-zip.spec SRPM : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pecl-zip-1.4.1-1.fc5.src.rpm Mock : http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/php-pecl-zip-build.log Changes : - update to 1.4.1 - bundle the v3.01 PHP LICENSE file - Suppr. Requires zip, Add Provides php-pecl(zip) and php-zip - change defattr php-zip is provided according to new PHP guidelines. -- 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 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager
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: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172755 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 15:47 EST --- Sorry that this package dropped off my radar... Deji: You still around? The only blocker I still see here is what to put in the spec for License. I think STL or even xcompmgr would be acceptable. Any thoughts? It would be good to get this 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 187609] Review Request: tre - POSIX compatible regexp library with approximate matching
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: tre - POSIX compatible regexp library with approximate matching https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187609 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 15:49 EST --- Any further progress on an updated submission? There is interest in the crm114 submission that requires this 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 184080] Review Request: webmin
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: webmin https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184080 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added QAContact|fedora-extras- |fedora-package- |[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 16:24 EST --- Since there are so many issues here and no activity for the last 2 months, I am going to close this bug in a few days unless there is any objection. Jason: Feel free to resubmit with a new spec if there is still interest. -- 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 190007] Review Request: php-pecl-zip
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-pecl-zip
Alias: php-pecl-zip
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=190007
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 17:32 EST ---
All items fixed.
Please add %{version}-%{release} to php-pecl(zip) in Provides or else let me
know why it should not be there.
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 189783] Review Request: e17: The enlightenment DR17 window manager
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: e17: The enlightenment DR17 window manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189783 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 18:07 EST --- #9 .028 needs some of the deps updated aswell to build successful -- 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 181445] Review Request: php-shout
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-shout https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=181445 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 18:48 EST --- I did do a handful of reviews back then, and there was some confusion on terminology and whether or not a newcomer like me was actually allowed to approve and close a bug or just offer comments... then through a long series of waiting on libshout=2 and several iterations of my RPM, I never have gotten approved / sponsored. Though this is my first package I submitted, I also have horde and php-pear-Mail-Mine up for review, so I think theoretically you could 'sponsor' me with either of those packages if you still feel php-shout isn't up to par, and I can then import the other packages when they get 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 197292] New: Review Request: perl-Contextual-Return
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=197292 Summary: Review Request: perl-Contextual-Return 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://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Contextual-Return.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Contextual-Return-v0.1.0-0.fc5.src.rpm Description: This module allows you to define return values of a perl sub which are appropriate given the calling context. -- 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 197295] New: Review Request: perl-List-Compare
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=197295 Summary: Review Request: perl-List-Compare 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://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-List-Compare.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-List-Compare-0.33-0.fc5.src.rpm Description: Advanced functionality to compare members of two or more lists. -- 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 197292] Review Request: perl-Contextual-Return
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-Contextual-Return https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197292 [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 197298] New: Review Request: perl-Locale-SubCountry
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=197298 Summary: Review Request: perl-Locale-SubCountry 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://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Locale-SubCountry.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Locale-SubCountry-1.37-0.fc5.src.rpm Description: This module allows you to convert the full name for a countries administrative region to the code commonly used for postal addressing. The reverse lookup can also be done. Sub country codes are defined in ISO 3166-2:1998, Codes for the representation of names of countries and their subdivisions. Sub countries are termed as states in the US and Australia, provinces in Canada and counties in the UK and Ireland. -- 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 197302] New: Review Request: perl-Math-Round
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=197302 Summary: Review Request: perl-Math-Round 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://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Math-Round.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Math-Round-0.05-0.fc5.src.rpm Description: Math::Round supplies functions that will round numbers in different ways. The functions round and nearest are exported by default; others are available as described below. use ... qw(:all) exports all functions. -- 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 197292] Review Request: perl-Contextual-Return
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-Contextual-Return https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197292 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 20:23 EST --- Note that BuildRequires: perl is not required, and BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) is doubly redundant as it is part of the base Perl package. For some reason this package provides perl(Carp) and perl(DB), probably because the dependency generator finds package Carp and package DB somewhere in the package. You will need to filter these. Some tests are skipped due to missing modules. You should add BR: perl(Test::Pod) and perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) for better test coverage. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. * source files match upstream: 2651c1c521ad4b42e0efbeac664fade6 Contextual-Return-v0.1.0.tar.gz * latest version is being packaged. O BuildRequires are proper (perl and perl(Test::More) are unnecessary) * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. X final provides and requires are sane: X perl(Carp) perl(Contextual::Return) perl(Contextual::Return::Failure) perl(Contextual::Return::Lvalue) perl(Contextual::Return::Value) X perl(DB) perl-Contextual-Return = v0.1.0-0.fc6 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(Contextual::Return) perl(Scalar::Util) perl(Want) perl(overload) perl(strict) perl(version) perl(warnings) * no shared libraries are present. * 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. X %check is present and all tests pass, but some are skipped due to missing modules which are present in the distro: All tests successful, 2 tests skipped. Files=17, Tests=180, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.62 cusr + 0.21 csys = 0.83 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. -- 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 192912] Review Request: paps
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: paps https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192912 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO_REPORTER |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 20:25 EST --- cups-1.2.1-16 has a dependency of paps now. -- 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 197293] Review Request: perl-IO-Prompt
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-Prompt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197293 [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 197293] Review Request: perl-IO-Prompt
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-Prompt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197293 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 20:43 EST --- Note that BuildRequires: perl is redundant, and perl(Test::More), perl(IO::Handle) and perl(POSIX) are all provided by the base Perl package. The test suite skips some tests because of missing modules; you should add BR: perl(Test::Pod), perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) for better test coverage. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. * source files match upstream: c62e369783af1f3dfe775e5d80686b61 IO-Prompt-v0.99.4.tar.gz * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: perl(IO::Prompt) perl(IO::Prompt::ReturnVal) perl-IO-Prompt = v0.99.4-0.fc6 = perl = 0:5.008 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(IO::Handle) perl(POSIX) perl(Term::ReadKey) perl(Want) perl(strict) perl(version) * no shared libraries are present. * 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. X %check is present and all tests pass; however, some tests are skipped due to missing modules. All tests successful, 2 tests skipped. Files=3, Tests=1, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.10 cusr + 0.02 csys = 0.12 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. -- 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 197295] Review Request: perl-List-Compare
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-List-Compare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197295 [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 197304] New: Review Request: perl-WWW-Myspace
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=197304 Summary: Review Request: perl-WWW-Myspace 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://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-WWW-Myspace.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-WWW-Myspace-0.49-0.fc5.src.rpm Description: WWW::Myspace.pm provides methods to access your myspace.com account and functions automatically. It provides a simple interface for scripts to log in, access lists of friends, scan user's profiles, retreive profile data, send messages, and post comments. -- 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 197304] Review Request: perl-WWW-Myspace
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-WWW-Myspace https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197304 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||197292, 197293, 197295, ||197298, 197302 -- 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 197302] Review Request: perl-Math-Round
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-Math-Round https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197302 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||197304 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 197298] Review Request: perl-Locale-SubCountry
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-Locale-SubCountry https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197298 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||197304 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 197295] Review Request: perl-List-Compare
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-List-Compare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197295 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||197304 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 197292] Review Request: perl-Contextual-Return
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-Contextual-Return https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197292 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||197304 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 197293] Review Request: perl-IO-Prompt
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-Prompt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197293 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||197304 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 197295] Review Request: perl-List-Compare
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-List-Compare https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197295 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778, 197304 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 20:59 EST --- Note that BuildRequires: perl is redundant; it is part of the default build root. Review: * package meets naming and packaging guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * dist tag is present. * build root is correct. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. License text not included upstream. * source files match upstream: 205677fa8e207afedbf800673a3c14de List-Compare-0.33.tar.gz * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: perl(List::Compare) = 0.33 perl(List::Compare::Accelerated) perl(List::Compare::Base::_Auxiliary) = 0.33 perl(List::Compare::Base::_Engine) = 0.33 perl(List::Compare::Functional) = 0.33 perl(List::Compare::Multiple) perl(List::Compare::Multiple::Accelerated) perl-List-Compare = 0.33-0.fc6 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.8.8) perl(Carp) perl(List::Compare::Base::_Auxiliary) perl(List::Compare::Base::_Engine) perl(strict) * no shared libraries are present. * 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=28, Tests=22945, 4 wallclock secs ( 3.59 cusr + 0.47 csys = 4.06 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 197304] Review Request: perl-WWW-Myspace
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-WWW-Myspace https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197304 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|197295 | -- 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 197293] Review Request: perl-IO-Prompt
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-Prompt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197293 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 21:00 EST --- Updated with additional buildreqs. Spec URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-IO-Prompt.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-IO-Prompt-v0.99.4-0.1.fc5.src.rpm (note the odd release #'s are just so I can release the initial build inside extras as -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 197292] Review Request: perl-Contextual-Return
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-Contextual-Return https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197292 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 21:08 EST --- Spec URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Contextual-Return.spec SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Contextual-Return-v0.1.0-0.1.fc5.src.rpm Updated BR, added provides filter. -- 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 196378] Review Request: kdegraphics-extras: Extras, including kuickshow
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: kdegraphics-extras: Extras, including kuickshow https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196378 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added 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 188359] Review Request: bugzilla - bug tracking 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: bugzilla - bug tracking tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188359 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 21:20 EST --- Since no one has spoken up about testing with SELinux and the package shipped in Extras 4/5/devel several days ago, I'm going to close this review request and just wait for another bug to show up (if one should show up, that is) on SELinux issues. -- 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 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager
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: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172755 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 21:31 EST --- Ok, here is it, with 'STL' for license. ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/xcompmgr/xcompmgr.spec ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/xcompmgr/xcompmgr-1.1.3-4.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 194355] Review Request: imlib
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: imlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194355 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 21:35 EST --- Excellent. ok on 1-5. On 6 I'm not sure. It's not good that it's a .so that doesn't have a major name in it, but this is very much a legacy library. Perhaps it's worth asking on the extras/maintainers list about it? It's been this way for ages and I'm afraid fixing it would break something, so not sure it's a blocker in this case. Perhaps someone on the list would have ideas on how to fix it without intrusive and difficult patches? -- 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 172755] Review Request: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager
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: xcompmgr - X11 composite manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=172755 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 21:39 EST --- Looks fine with me... go ahead and import and build. Don't forget to close this as NEXTRELEASE once it's imported and built. -- 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 194355] Review Request: imlib
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: imlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194355 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 21:39 EST --- OK, I have dropped an email to the maintainers list. Lets see what happens. -- 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 197137] Review Request: Conga - Remote management 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: Conga - Remote management interface https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197137 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 22:02 EST --- Is this submission for extras or should it be for core? Also, why is this bug marked Fedora Project Contributors only? -- 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 175168] Review Request: gideon - GUI designer for GTK/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: gideon - GUI designer for GTK/C++ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=175168 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 22:20 EST --- An unofficial review. 1. It looks like the URL has changed. 2. Using %makeinstall is discouraged. see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines -- 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 196007] Review Request: kdirstat
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: kdirstat
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=196007
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 22:26 EST ---
The issues I saw are fixed:
%_docdir/HTML/en/kdirstat/common is no longer a dependency.
%{_datadir}/apps/kconf_update/ is no longer owned.
The two errant Requires(*) are gone.
The new rpmlint warning is safe to ignore; %_docdir/HTML/en/common is owned by
kdelibs, which is a dependency (via libkdecore.so.4).
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 194355] Review Request: imlib
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: imlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194355 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 23:47 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) snip 5. Building with mock for fc5, the build fails and I get: ... gcc -DDJPEG_PROG=\/usr/bin/djpeg\ -DCJPEG_PROG=\/usr/bin/cjpeg\ -DCONVERT_PATH=\\ -DNETPBM_PATH=\\ -DSYSTEM_IMRC=\/etc/imrc\ -DIMLIB_LIB=\/usr/lib\ -DSYSCONFDIR=\/etc\ -I. -I. -I.. -I./.. -I/usr/include/gtk-1.2 -I/usr/include/glib-1.2 -I/usr/lib/glib/include -I/usr/include/gtk-1.2 -I/usr/include/glib-1.2 -I/usr/lib/glib/include -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -Wp,-MD,.deps/cache.pp -c cache.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/cache.o In file included from cache.c:5: gdk_imlib_private.h:104: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'XShmSegmentInfo' make[2]: *** [cache.lo] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/imlib-1.9.13/gdk_imlib' make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/imlib-1.9.13' make: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.58804 (%build) It builds ok in just fc5 from the command line, so might be a missing BR or the like under mock? 6. rpmlint output: E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-xpm.so libimlib-xpm.so E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-jpeg.so libimlib-jpeg.so E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-tiff.so libimlib-tiff.so E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-ppm.so libimlib-ppm.so E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-bmp.so libimlib-bmp.so E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-ps.so libimlib-ps.so E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-gif.so libimlib-gif.so E: imlib invalid-soname /usr/lib/libimlib-png.so libimlib-png.so invalid-soname : The soname of the library is neither of the form liblibname.so.major or liblibname-major.so. There was mention in fedora-maintainers list about this being a legacy issue... Do you mean that these packages or libraries that are causing these problems are being maintained by the Fedora Legacy team at this time? What versions of Fedora Core is this package being built for? Or do you mean something else? -- 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 194355] Review Request: imlib
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: imlib https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=194355 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-06-29 23:54 EST --- There was mention in fedora-maintainers list about this being a legacy issue... Can you provide the url to the message? I posted today about it on maintainers@ so if its been covered, I missed 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
