[Bug 202496] Review Request: quodlibet - A music management program
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: quodlibet - A music management program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202496 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 02:28 EST --- (In reply to comment #15) The packager has indicated on extras-list that he is currently quite busy. Sorry, I missed that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 187317] Review Request: mindi
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: mindi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187317 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 03:13 EST --- Hi Bruno, Dennis! I've been watching this review request and the one for mondo (bug 187318) for a while and I'm really eager to see mondorescue become part of the Fedora project (Fedora Extras, in this case). The problem is, Fedora currently doesn't provide sufficient backup facilities in Core or Extras. Sure, we have rdiff-backup, duplicity, dump, tar, etc., but nothing can compare with mondorescue's simplicity and ability to do a disaster recovery bare-metal restore. I've been researching various linux lvm-capable bare-metal restore solutions and mondorescue is my best bet so far. Taking into account the aforementioned issues, we should try to be more flexible and respect the specific nature of bare-metal restore process and try to work together, especially if the current upstream maintainer and lead developer of mondorescue is taking time to package mindi and mondo according to Fedora Extras Guidelines. Best regards, Tadej -- 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 207853] Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC
notation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207853
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 03:19 EST ---
Quick look:
(In reply to comment #1)
+ Mockbuild is successfull for i386 FC6
Really? I cannot rebuild this in mock.
Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.91772
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ LANG=C
+ export LANG
+ unset DISPLAY
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ rm -rf tclabc-1.0.7.fc6
+ /bin/gzip -dc /builddir/build/SOURCES/tclabc-1.0.7.tar.gz
+ tar -xf -
+ STATUS=0
+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
+ cd tclabc-1.0.7.fc6
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.91772: line 33: cd: tclabc-1.0.7.fc6: No such file or directory
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.91772 (%prep)
RPM build errors:
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.91772 (%prep)
%{?dist} should not be added in version but in release.
* Well,
tk requires tcl, tk-devel requires tcl-devel and tk, so
BuildRequires tcl tk tcl-devel
Requires tcl
are all unnecessary.
--
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 207853] Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC
notation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207853
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 03:26 EST ---
mtasaka,
Gérard Milmeister has changed package and SPEC after i did revivew. I have
that SPEC file which did not contained any dist tag. If you see my review i have
clearly mentioned that
- dist tag is NOT present
Here is diff between those 2 SPECs
--- tclabc_old.spec 2006-09-27 12:41:26.0 +0530
+++ tclabc.spec 2006-09-27 12:41:49.0 +0530
@@ -1,20 +1,20 @@
Name: tclabc
-Version:1.0.7
+Version:1.0.7%{?dist}
Release:1
Summary:A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation
Group: Applications/Multimedia
-License: GPL
+License:GPL
URL:http://moinejf.free.fr
Source0:http://moinejf.free.fr/tclabc-1.0.7.tar.gz
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
BuildRequires: tcl
-BuildRequires: tk
-BuildRequires: tcl-devel
-BuildRequires: tk-devel
+BuildRequires: tk
+BuildRequires: tcl-devel
+BuildRequires: tk-devel
Requires: tcl
-Requires: tk
-Requires: abcm2ps
+Requires: tk
+Requires: abcm2ps
%description
--
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 207853] Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207853 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 03:32 EST --- mtasaka, I also checked timestamps and filesizes of both SRPMS, one i have and the one that is online both are different. do u want MD5 checksum of that? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207853] Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207853 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 04:08 EST --- Hello, Parag: Well, anyway Gérard should upload new spec and srpm (with release tag incremented) to avoid confusion. You and me can wait for it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 04:16 EST --- Oops, undefined NON-weak symbols complaint, I meant. -- 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 199108] Review Request: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package
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: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 04:57 EST --- I'm using it now, works fine (I'm just using the drivers). What needs the gtk+ libs (nothing yet, of course), and can those files be put into a subpackage as well? -- 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 207612] Review Request: zidrav - Zorba's Incredible Data Repairer And Verifier
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: zidrav - Zorba's Incredible Data Repairer And Verifier https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207612 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 05:18 EST --- Imported and built for devel, FC5 branch requested. Thanks for the review! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207532] Review Request: kbackup - Back up your data in a simple, user friendly way
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: kbackup - Back up your data in a simple, user friendly way https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207532 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 05:27 EST --- %changelog * Wed Sep 26 2006 Alain Portal aportal[AT]univ-montp2[DOT]fr 0.5-6 - Link the good directories * Tue Sep 26 2006 Alain Portal aportal[AT]univ-montp2[DOT]fr 0.5-5 - Fix absolute symlinks 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 187317] Review Request: mindi
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: mindi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187317 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 05:42 EST --- Thanks Tadej for the feedback. I've since March made a lot of modifications to both the spec files and also the code itself, so that mindi and mondo can integrate Fedora. And It has improved the project packaging and work. In 2.2.0, I'll add a mindi-busybox package, which will indeed remove the binary files from mindi. I hope it's a move well taken. What I can't do now is the ppc adaptation, as I said due to lack of hardware, knowledge, and incitation to so it, but I generally welcome patches. I hope to fix the latest bugs and publish 2.2.0 for the 8th of October. I'll then provide you a new build so that you can look at and comment. Bruno. -- 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 187706] Review Request: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation
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: alsa-oss - Userspace OSS emulation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=187706
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 05:59 EST ---
I'm not an official reviewer, but some review comments:
* source files match upstream:
6bb04b5ca6c6f7eed4827bd054a4ddeff6fb4e99 alsa-oss-1.0.11rc3.tar.bz2
* not newest version:
ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/oss-lib/alsa-oss-1.0.12.tar.bz2
* spec file does not use macros consistently: $RPM_BUILD_ROOT,
${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} and $RPM_OPT_FLAGS
(See
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-f3d77b27a5d29dfc1f5600ef3fc836f2e317badf
)
* -devel package has static libs and libtool archives specified in %files
section (not packaged, though), see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-2302ec1e1f44202c9cc4bcce24cb711266557ad7
* dist tag is NOT present
* spec file named correctly
* build root is correct
* license field matches actual license, license is GPL, license text included
in package
* BuildRequires are correct
* appropriate compiler flags present
* %clean is present
* package builds in mock (FC-5, i386)
* rpmlint:
alsa-oss SRPM:
E: alsa-oss unknown-key GPG#f77eed90
W: alsa-oss mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs
alsa-oss RPM: no output
alsa-oss-devel RPM:
W: alsa-oss-devel summary-not-capitalized alsa-oss headers
W: alsa-oss-devel no-documentation
* package is not relocatable
* package installs properly
* documentation is small, no need for -doc subpackage
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package
* scriptlets are good
* code, not content
* -devel Requires correct
--
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 193867] Review Request: klamav - Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop
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: klamav - Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193867 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 06:15 EST --- Updated file here: ftp://andriy.asplinux.com.ua/pub/people/andy/extras/klamav-0.38-3.src.rpm * Wed Sep 27 2006 Andy Shevchenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.38-3 - drop zlib-devel and bzip2-devel - require clamav-update - remove condition check from post scriptlets - satisfy rpmlint claim on debuginfo subpackage - fix Tefminal value in desktop-file - do not ship NEWS file due to is empty -- 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 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 06:36 EST --- For some reason, I don't have these on my rpmlint output. Did you only rpmlint my srpm package or you have rebuilt and rpmlint ? I know you are running rawhide Mamuro, maybe these output comes from rpmlint my FC5 built srpm. Updated: SPEC: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/toped.spec SRPM: http://chitlesh.funpic.de/rpm/toped-0.8.1-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 06:51 EST --- Before checking 0.8.1-2; Well, in fact I did not get the rpmlint complaint (in comment #2) by rpmlint toped-0.8.1-1.fc6.i386.rpm. However, when I once install toped and check this by rpmlint toped (I knew it recently that rpmlint can be used for installed packages), those rpmlint warnings appear. I don't know why these rpmlint does not appear on binary rpm, however, these warnings are indeed _TRUE_ because: --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# ldd -r /usr/lib/libtpd_DB.so.0.0.0 linux-gate.so.1 = (0xb7f33000) libglut.so.3 = /usr/lib/libglut.so.3 (0x006a4000) ... libfreetype.so.6 = /usr/lib/libfreetype.so.6 (0x078a3000) undefined symbol: Properties(/usr/lib/libtpd_DB.so.0.0.0) undefined symbol: _ZNK5DBboxmlERK3CTM (/usr/lib/libtpd_DB.so.0.0.0) undefined symbol: _ZN8SGBitSetD1Ev (/usr/lib/libtpd_DB.so.0.0.0) undefined symbol: _ZN9polycross11segmentlistD1Ev (/usr/lib/libtpd_DB.so.0.0.0) undefined symbol: _ZN8SGBitSet3setEt(/usr/lib/libtpd_DB.so.0.0.0) undefined symbol: _ZN5DBbox9getcornerEh (/usr/lib/libtpd_DB.so.0.0.0) --- so something is surely wrong about linking libraries. -- 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 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 [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 199108] Review Request: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package
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: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 08:02 EST --- I have tested the compiled drivers from repository (x86_64/fc5). Working fine on a canon ip3000/USB using ip4000 driver. -- 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 208250] New: Review Request: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers
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=208250 Summary: Review Request: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/piklab.spec SRPM URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/piklab-0.11.3-1.src.rpm Description: Piklab is a graphic development environment for PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers. It interfaces with various toochains for compiling and assembling and it supports several Microchip and direct programmers. -- 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 208254] New: Review Request: pikloops - Code generator for PIC delays
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=208254 Summary: Review Request: pikloops - Code generator for PIC delays Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SPECS/pikloops.spec SRPM URL: http://linuxelectronique.free.fr/download/fedora/5/SRPMS/pikloops-0.2.1-1.src.rpm Description: PiKLoop generate for you code to create delays for Microchip PIC microcontrollers. It is an useful companion for Pikdev or Piklab IDE. -- 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 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 10:25 EST --- Well, I asked on Fedora-Extras list how to deal with these complaints and it seems that these are NOT a blocker. However, I would try to remove these complaints (I may give up). Anyway it is better that you report this to upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 10:47 EST --- Upstream has been contacted. Svilen, who is the upstream is already in Cc to this bug :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 11:02 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) Upstream has been contacted. Svilen, who is the upstream is already in Cc to this bug :) Thank you. I hope Svilen will solve this issue. By the way (this is not for toped) same things are found for libgeda. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpmlint libgeda W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 load_newer_backup_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 arc_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 line_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 text_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 x_log_update_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 net_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 select_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 complex_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 circle_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 box_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 do_logging W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 bus_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 pin_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 picture_draw_func W: libgeda undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgeda.so.26.0.0 variable_set_func [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpm -q libgeda libgeda-20060906-2.fc6 Would you also report this to upstream? (I also found this problem for a package maintained by me so I have to report to upstream, too) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 193867] Review Request: klamav - Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop
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: klamav - Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193867 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 11:05 EST --- One last thing :) - fix Tefminal value in desktop-file Correct this typo, It should be Terminal. However I won't block this package because I'm sure you will update the package to 0.38-4, before committing to CVS, right ? This package has been 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 193867] Review Request: klamav - Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop
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: klamav - Clam Anti-Virus on the KDE Desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193867 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 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 208169] Review Request: python-twisted-core - An asynchronous networking framework written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-core - An asynchronous networking
framework written in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208169
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 12:39 EST ---
First pass comments:
1. The files list is very long and results in lots of File listed twice
warnings from rpmbuild. These could be fixed by removing these lines from the
%files list:
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/manhole/ui/*.py*
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/manhole/ui/*.glade
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/manhole/ui/gtkrc
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/persisted/journal/
However, the whole %{python_sitearch} %files tree could be simplified down to:
%dir %{python_sitearch}/twisted/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/*.py*
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/application/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/cred/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/enterprise/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/internet/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/manhole/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/persisted/
%dir %{python_sitearch}/twisted/plugins/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/plugins/*.py*
%ghost %{python_sitearch}/twisted/plugins/dropin.cache
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/protocols/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/python/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/scripts/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/spread/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/tap/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/test/
%{python_sitearch}/twisted/trial/
2. There is lots of unpackaged documentation in the doc/ directory. How about a
separate -doc subpackage?
3. rpmlint output:
E: python-twisted-core non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/internet/glib2reactor.py 0644
W: python-twisted-core devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/spread/cBanana.c
W: python-twisted-core devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/protocols/_c_urlarg.c
E: python-twisted-core non-executable-script
/usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/trial/test/scripttest.py 0644
E: python-twisted-core script-without-shebang
/usr/share/zsh/site-functions/_twisted_zsh_stub
The non-executable-script errors could be fixed by quick couple of seds in
%prep:
sed -i -e '/^#! *\/usr\/bin\/python/d' twisted/internet/glib2reactor.py
sed -i -e '/^#!\/bin\/python/d'twisted/trial/test/scripttest.py
The script-without-shebang error could be fixed by installing
/usr/share/zsh/site-functions/_twisted_zsh_stub with mode 644
Not sure about the devel-file-in-non-devel-package warning; are these devel
files or are they needed at runtime for something? Are they needed at all?
4. Strictly speaking the package should have a dependency on zsh for the
ownership of the %{_datadir}/zsh/site-functions directory. I guess the right
think to do would be to break out a separate -zsh subpackage for it, but that
seems rather like overkill for one tiny file. Thoughts?
5. I think the URL for this package should be
http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/wiki/TwistedCore, with
http://www.twistedmatrix.com/ reserved for the python-twisted metapackage.
--
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 207047] Review Request: ed2k_hash - Ed2k file hash calculator
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: ed2k_hash - Ed2k file hash calculator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207047 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 13:16 EST --- http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/ed2k_hash.spec http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/ed2k_hash-0.4.0-3.src.rpm But of course! I don't know how I missed that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 201000] Review Request: libFoundation - A free implementation of OpenStep's Foundation Kit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libFoundation - A free implementation of OpenStep's Foundation Kit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=201000 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 13:23 EST --- After some consideration, I've decided to ask you to move /usr/include/extensions to, say, /usr/include/Foundation/extension. The name *is* too generic and even X11 has its extensions/ dir in /usr/include/X11. -- 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 165932] Review Request: An SMTP Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: An SMTP Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165932 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 13:28 EST --- This package is already approved and has not been imported for a long time. I am going to close this in a week if this is not imported within that time frame. -- 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 204152] Review Request: orca - Accessibility replacement for gnopernicus
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: orca - Accessibility replacement for gnopernicus https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204152 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 13:30 EST --- This package has already been approved and imported into Fedora Core but this review report has not been closed yet. Closing it 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 165932] Review Request: msmtp - An SMTP Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: msmtp - An SMTP Client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: An SMTP |Review Request: msmtp - An |Client |SMTP Client -- 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 207761] Review Request: xpdf - A PDF file viewer for the X Window System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xpdf - A PDF file viewer for the X Window System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207761 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 13:33 EST --- Built for devel, thanks for the thorough review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208254] Review Request: pikloops - Code generator for PIC delays
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: pikloops - Code generator for PIC delays https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 13:41 EST --- Good: + Rpmlint doesn't complaint source rpm. + Local build works fine. + Tar ball in source rpm matches with upstream + Local install/uninstall works fine. + Rpmlint of installed rpm doesn't complaints. + Programm starts properly. + Mock build works fine. Bad: - Debuginfo package is empty. - QT environment variable are not sourced. - Desktop file: the Categories tag should contain Application (wiki: PackagingGuidelines#desktop) - Missing dependancy on update-desktop-database for %post (package desktop-file-utils) - Missing dependancy on update-desktop-database for %postun (package desktop-file-utils) -- 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 207047] Review Request: ed2k_hash - Ed2k file hash calculator
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: ed2k_hash - Ed2k file hash calculator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207047 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 13:42 EST --- Okay. Please go ahead. -- This package (ed2k_hash) is APPROVED by me. -- 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 207612] Review Request: zidrav - Zorba's Incredible Data Repairer And Verifier
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: zidrav - Zorba's Incredible Data Repairer And Verifier https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207612 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207047] Review Request: ed2k_hash - Ed2k file hash calculator
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: ed2k_hash - Ed2k file hash calculator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207047 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 14:09 EST --- Imported and built for devel. FC-5 branch requested. -- 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 208250] Review Request: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers
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: piklab - Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208250 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 14:54 EST --- Good: + Local build works fine. + Local install/uninstall works fine. + Program starts without complains. + Tar ball in source package matches with upstream. + Mock build works fine. Bad: - Rpmlint of source package complaints: pmlint piklab-0.11.3-1.src.rpm E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers E: piklab unknown-key GPG#8d4d7450 W: piklab strange-permission piklab-0.11.3.desktop.typo-fr.patch 0600 W: piklab strange-permission piklab-0.11.3.x-desktop-fr.patch 0600 W: piklab strange-permission piklab.spec 0600 W: piklab mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 51, tab: line 3) - rpmlint complains on binary rpm: E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common /tmp/piklab-0.11.3-1.i686.rpm.18087/usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop: warning: file contains key DocPath, this key is currently reserved for use within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by X- - Please use http://switch.dl.sourceforge.net/..., so spectool will work properly. - Qt environment variable was not sourced. - Duplicate BuildRequires: libart_lgpl-devel (by kdelibs-devel), fam-devel (by kdelibs-devel) - BuildRequires: gettext is missing (required to build the translations) - Rpmlint complains on installed package: E: piklab summary-too-long Development environment for applications based on PIC and dsPIC microcontrollers W: piklab dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/piklab/common ../doc/common //usr/share/applications/kde/piklab.desktop: warning: file contains key DocPath, this key is currently reserved for use within KDE, and should in the future KDE releases be prefixed by X- -- 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 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 14:59 EST --- Thanks guys for your input! I had a quick look ... One of the reasons seems to be that some global variables (always troubles with them) are defined in the main module and used in the libraries. They are certainly not that much though, so it should be something else as well. I'm on it and will get back as soon as I know more. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192311] Review Request: cobbler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cobbler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192311 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 15:51 EST --- Sponsored you, should eb good to go for building -- 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 207077] Review Request: classpath-0.92 - Essential Libraries for Java
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: classpath-0.92 - Essential Libraries for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207077 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 17:20 EST --- Fair enough. I'll withdraw the package from review. Thanks for the 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 177512] Review Request: mysql-connector-net
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: mysql-connector-net
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177512
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 17:29 EST ---
Spec Name or Url:
http://www.knox.net.nz/~nodoid/mysql-connector-net.spec
SRPM Name or Url:
http://www.knox.net.nz/~nodoid/mysql-connector-net-1.0.7-8.src.rpm
Fixes the above problems.
E: mysql-connector-net hardcoded-library-path in %{_prefix}/lib
I think this is due to the core mono packaging?
Yes, for FC-5 until after FC-6 release when hopefully FC-5's version will be
bumped
E: mysql-connector-net-debuginfo empty-debuginfo-package
Why no debuginfo files? Other mono packages have them.
Depends on the package - if there are standard .so files in there, then debug
info is generated. Mono doesn't generate ELF debug info, so if it's a pure C#
package, the debuginfo package will be empty
E: mysql-connector-net no-binary
E: mysql-connector-net only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
I think those can be ignored, as rpmlint doesn't know mono bins.
Correct ;-)
--
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 207853] Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclabc - A Tcl interface and a Tk GUI to the ABC notation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207853 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 17:33 EST --- This is the correct new srpm: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/5/i386/SRPMS.gemi/tclabc-1.0.7-2.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207763] Review Request: ddd - GUI for several command-line debuggers
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: ddd - GUI for several command-line debuggers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207763
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 17:37 EST ---
* The files %{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/COPYING and
%{_datadir}/%{name}-%{version}/NEWS are needed at runtime,
they shouldn't be rm even though they are duplicates.
* I think that COPYING.LIB shouldn't be shipped since there is
no file covered by the LGPL (if I'm not wrong).
* I think that libtool isn't needed as BR now.
* libXmu-devel and libXpm-devel are dependencies of libXaw-devel.
apart from the non-UTF8 warnings for info files, there is an
error:
E: ddd file-in-usr-marked-as-conffile /usr/share/ddd-3.3.11/ddd/Ddd
I agree with you that it is sufficient and although it would be
better to have Ddd below %_sysconfdir, this is something for
upstream, and certainly not a blocker.
When I start ddd I have the following warnings on the console:
Warning: Cannot convert string -*-symbol-*-*-*-*-*-120-*-*-*-*-adobe-* to type
FontStruct
(Annoyed? Try 'Edit-Preferences-General-Suppress X Warnings'!)
Warning: XmStringGetNextComponent: unknown type 164801264
Warning: XmStringGetNextComponent: unknown type 164801312
Any idea on what cause them, and how harmfull the corresponding
issues are? (in general I tend to ignore such warnings, they
are most of the time caused by something else than the package).
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177211] Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility
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: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177211 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 17:40 EST --- *ping*? -- 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 207763] Review Request: ddd - GUI for several command-line debuggers
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: ddd - GUI for several command-line debuggers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207763 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 18:00 EST --- -12 has: - got rid of duplicate doc file removal - got rid of COPYING.LIB from %doc - no need for libtool BR - no need for libXmu-devel, libXpm-devel BR Dunno about those console warnings, I see them too, but they don't seem harmful (ddd works fine with them), and the program offers a mechanism for suppressing them. New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/ddd-3.3.11-12.fc6.src.rpm New SPEC: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/ddd.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207846] Review Request: perl-Finance-YahooQuote - Perl interface to get stock quotes from Yahoo! Finance
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-Finance-YahooQuote - Perl interface to get stock quotes from Yahoo! Finance Alias: finance-YahooQuote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207846 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||208348 -- 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 207846] Review Request: perl-Finance-YahooQuote - Perl interface to get stock quotes from Yahoo! Finance
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-Finance-YahooQuote - Perl interface to get stock quotes from Yahoo! Finance Alias: finance-YahooQuote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207846 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 18:53 EST --- Ok, I found the problem, see bug #208348 -- 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 177211] Review Request: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility
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: newsx - NNTP news exchange utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177211 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 19:46 EST --- It builds fine in a mock here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208200] Review Request: toped - IC Layout Editor
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: toped - IC Layout Editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208200 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 19:54 EST --- OK, apart from the global variables there is a strange stuff related to the libtool. I don't know what's the exact difference between module_name_LTADD libname and module_name_LDADD libname but it seems that the first one links the somehow the module to the library and ldd can't see that dependancy. Didn't investagate further, by replacing the first line with the second certainly fixes all the remaining troubles ... well except a single one related to the wxWidgets top application object. This one will need a little bit more time So - I'll have to commit some changes in the packet. What is the best way to proceed further - shall I create a new tarball say 0.8.2? Chitlesh, it seems that the link to the srpm is broken -- 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 199108] Review Request: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package
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: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-27 20:54 EST --- I rebuilt Guteprint for x86_64 system using mock and tested it with Epson Stylus CX4600. Guteprint immediately recognized the printer and set the right driver. With the old gimp-print, the closed driver was for Stylus CX3200. As a result, most of the configuration for CX4600 are available including the CMYK color setting. The noticeable difference is the improved speed of the printer and the bug that prevent a proper output of paper is fixed. I really hope this pacakge will make on Extras repository once rpmlint will be sorted as it dramatically improve the performance of the printer. Kudos for Epson for helping providing Linux support for their printer. Although it is too late to include it on Core repository, this package will definitively be available as default on FC7 and above. -- 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 199108] Review Request: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package
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: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-28 00:20 EST --- Excellent to hear some positive testing reports both here and on the lists. In reply to comment #63: It looks like the libgutenprintui libraries in the main package need gtk libgutenprintui.so.1 libgutenprintui2.so.1 I don't know if they can be split off or not... Parag? Parag: - Can you apply something like the changes from comment #58 with a proper changelog entry and upload a new spec/src.rpm? - I just did another fc6/x86_64 build here and it worked. Either the problem I was seeing before was something that was temp broken in devel, or there is some kind of race condition in the build process that I managed to hit. - Can you also add '--disable-rpath' to the configure call? This shows up on x86_64 rpmlint as: E: gutenprint binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libgutenprintui.so.1.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: gutenprint binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/ libgutenprintui2.so.1.0.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: gutenprint binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/ijsgutenprint.5.0 ['/usr/ lib64'] E: gutenprint-cups binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/cups-genppd.5.0 ['/ usr/lib64'] E: gutenprint-cups binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib/cups/filter/ rastertogutenprint.5.0 ['/usr/lib64'] E: gutenprint-extras binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/testpattern ['/usr/ lib64'] -- 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 199108] Review Request: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package
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: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-28 00:28 EST ---
(In reply to comment #66)
Excellent to hear some positive testing reports both here and on the lists.
Thanks to all whot tested this package.
In reply to comment #63:
It looks like the libgutenprintui libraries in the main package need gtk
libgutenprintui.so.1
libgutenprintui2.so.1
I don't know if they can be split off or not... Parag?
I don't think we should split them and create a new package. Those are part of
gutenprint-devel package. And as all *.so.1 files must go to -devel packages,
ther are already there.
Parag:
- Can you apply something like the changes from comment #58 with a proper
changelog entry and upload a new spec/src.rpm?
Will do that later today.
- I just did another fc6/x86_64 build here and it worked. Either the problem
I
was seeing before was something that was temp broken in devel, or there is
some
kind of race condition in the build process that I managed to hit.
- Can you also add '--disable-rpath' to the configure call? This shows up on
x86_64 rpmlint as:
E: gutenprint binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/libgutenprintui.so.1.0.0
['/usr/lib64']
E: gutenprint binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/
libgutenprintui2.so.1.0.0 ['/usr/lib64']
E: gutenprint binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/ijsgutenprint.5.0 ['/usr/
lib64']
E: gutenprint-cups binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/sbin/cups-genppd.5.0 ['/
usr/lib64']
E: gutenprint-cups binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib/cups/filter/
rastertogutenprint.5.0 ['/usr/lib64']
E: gutenprint-extras binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/testpattern
['/usr/
lib64']
Kevin,
Sure will add --disable-rpath to ./configure in SPEC.
So same %{_libdir} macro worked for x86_64 right in mock 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 199108] Review Request: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package
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: gutenprint: Printer Drivers Package https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199108 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-09-28 01:15 EST --- Thanks peter, My mistake I forgot the following MUST - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package. Will Change SPEC and uplaod new package 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
