[Bug 193103] Review Request: Listen
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Listen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193103 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 03:21 EST --- right, python-ogg and python-vor aren't needed in 0.5.x branch, I'll lock further about R BR. I'm not sure that optionnal stuff should be required, some people will complaint about unecessary downloads. About translation files, it shouldn't be too difficult to move them, you can either modify the path in Makefile (ie: $(PREFIX)/share/locale/$$lang/LC_MESSAGES/ instead of $(PREFIX)/lib/listen/po/$$lang/LC_MESSAGES/), or move them during %install time. I'll try to push an update before the end of the week. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210423] Review Request: snitch - a powerful packet-shaping 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: snitch - a powerful packet-shaping utility Alias: volp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210423 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: main |Review Request: snitch - a |package name here - short |powerful packet-shaping |summary here |utility URL||http://snitch.sourceforge.ne ||t/ Status|CLOSED |NEW Keywords||Reopened Resolution|NOTABUG | OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210322] Review Request: perl-File-MimeInfo - Determine file type
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-File-MimeInfo - Determine file type https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210322 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 03:24 EST --- Added a patch blessed by upstream to add a new option which is important for my long-term goals... - add an option to launch mimeopen non interactively http://www.environnement.ens.fr/perso/dumas/fc-srpms/perl-File-MimeInfo-0.13-2.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 210424] Review Request: fail2ban - scan log files and ban IPs with too many password failures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fail2ban - scan log files and ban IPs with too many password failures https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210424 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: main |Review Request: fail2ban - |package name here - short |scan log files and ban IPs |summary here |with too many password ||failures URL||http://fail2ban.sourceforge. ||net/ OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210287] Review Request: Qt# - A set of qt bindings for mono
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Qt# - A set of qt bindings for mono https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210287 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 07:17 EST --- Oops! New URLS http://nodoid.homelinux.org/fedora/qtsharp-0.7.1-1.src.rpm http://nodoid.homelinux.org/fedora/qtsharp.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 210464] New: Review Request: anjuta-2 - A very capable IDE
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=210464 Summary: Review Request: anjuta-2 - A very capable IDE 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://nodoid.homelinux.org/fedora/anjuta-2.0.2-5.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://nodoid.homelinux.org/fedora/anjuta2.spec Description: This is the current release of the anjuta IDE. It has a lot of changes from the now depricated 1.2.4a branch and seems a lot more stable. Anjuta-1.2.4a is already in extras (maintained by me). This version builds happily in and out of mock. rpmlint does throw up some complaints of devel parts being in the non-devel package and some files being empty. These are deliberately there as they are used as blank forms/pre-produced code when you start anjuta-2 and begin a new project. The only other error is that anjuta2.spec is not a valid filename for a spec file. As anjuta-1.2.4a is still in FC5 (and will be until I'm happy with the stability of anjuta-2), I need to be able to differentiate between the two and this seems the most logical. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210285] Review Request: kfolding - KDE kicker applet for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kfolding - KDE kicker applet for [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210285 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 08:24 EST --- I am not able to fix this: [EMAIL PROTECTED] redhat]$ rpmlint -i RPMS/i386/kfolding-1.0.0-1.rc2.i386.rpm W: kfolding dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/kfolding/common ../common The relative symbolic link points nowhere. Otherwise above mentioned problems are fixed, and the new URL for SRPM is http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/progs/rpms/kfolding-1.0.0-1.rc2.src.rpm What should I do now? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 200422] Review Request: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: international-time (first package, seeking sponsor) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=200422 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 08:51 EST --- Thanks, updated. Spec URL: http://cyberelk.net/tim/data/international-time/international-time.spec SRPM URL: http://cyberelk.net/tim/data/international-time/international-time-0.0.1-2.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 210285] Review Request: kfolding - KDE kicker applet for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kfolding - KDE kicker applet for [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210285 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 10:00 EST --- The symlink is OK, the target is present in a package that is Required. Looks good now, i let tmraz take over 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 209082] Review Request: scanbuttond - Scanner Button tools to SANE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scanbuttond - Scanner Button tools to SANE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209082 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 10:06 EST --- Looks good to me. I think we have an APPROVED package. I have an HP PSC1350. Judging by the lack of an HP backend library, I guess this isn't the answer for me. (Of course, I haven't looked -- there may very well be a different software package that supports 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 209614] Review Request: wmmemload - windowmaker dock app
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmmemload - windowmaker dock app https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209614 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 10:30 EST --- Uploaded the fixed files: http://www.kovalsky.cz/packages/wmmemload.spec http://www.kovalsky.cz/packages/wmmemload-0.1.6-1.src.rpm Thank you for the review notes! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209615] Review Request: wmcpuload - WindowMaker dockapp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: wmcpuload - WindowMaker dockapp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209615 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 10:31 EST --- uploaded the new fixed files, please take a look http://www.kovalsky.cz/packages/wmcpuload.spec http://www.kovalsky.cz/packages/wmcpuload-1.0.1-1.src.rpm Thanks a lot for your review notes! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210285] Review Request: kfolding - KDE kicker applet for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: kfolding - KDE kicker applet for [EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210285
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 11:02 EST ---
%find_lang %{name} is present however the lang file is not included in the
filelist.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208898] Review Request: bluez-gnome -- Bluetooth pairing and control applet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bluez-gnome -- Bluetooth pairing and control applet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208898 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 11:54 EST --- Then I'd use /etc/xdg/autostart and file a bug to get KDE fixed. -- 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 165985] Review Request: Aeryn - A C++ testing framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Aeryn - A C++ testing framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=165985 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |201449 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 12:18 EST --- Closing. Reopen to resume work on this. -- 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 209082] Review Request: scanbuttond - Scanner Button tools to SANE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scanbuttond - Scanner Button tools to SANE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209082 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 12:22 EST --- thanks very much for approving package. Will import on Monday as i am on vacation now. Then will close this bug. yes HP backend is not there. But it can be worked provided developers should get some HP scanners to work on. Anyway thanks for your time. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210323] Review Request: perl-File-DesktopEntry - Object to handle .desktop files
Please 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-DesktopEntry - Object to handle .desktop files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210323 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 12:24 EST --- I was looking at the spec and then at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl and your spec doesnt have the provides stuff mentioned at the top, I wasnt sure if thats because it wasnt needed here or what. It does build fine in mock and rpmlint has nothing to say about 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 207782] Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing,
and communications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207782
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 12:30 EST ---
(In reply to comment #45)
and both itpp-config and /usr/lib/pkgconfig/itpp.pc appear to work correctly
for me.
Yes, it should work correctly. I just wonder whether
-lfftw3 -llapack -latlas -lblas -L/usr/lib/atlas -lstdc++ -lgfortranbegin
-lgfortran -lm -lgcc_s is REALLY needed for the two file (itpp-config
itpp.pc) .
-lfftw3. is really needed when compiling libitpp.so (i.e., in
building this package). However, once
linking is corectly done (as in -7 src.rpm) and since no header files include
header files in other packages, including -lfftw3 to itpp-config
itpp.pc is perhaps redundant.
In short, I think that itpp.pc can be:
--
prefix=/usr
exec_prefix=/usr
libdir=/usr/lib
includedir=/usr/include
Name: IT++
Description: IT++ is a C++ library of mathematical, signal processing, speech
processing, and communications classes and fu
nctions
Version: 3.10.5
URL: http://itpp.sourceforge.net/
Libs: -L${libdir} -litpp
Cflags:
--
and itpp-config can be:
--
...
--libs)
echo -L${libdir} -litpp
;;
--libs-opt)
echo -L${libdir} -litpp
;;
--libs-debug)
echo -L${libdir} -litpp
;;
--
Please check if this is possible. Other things are okay.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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] 2006-10-12 13:41 EST ---
Cheitlesh, I saw by mail that you imported 0.8.2-1.
I checked the spec file, however, it has a problem because
0.8.2-1 spec file (you imported) has the line:
%{_libdir}/libtpd_common.so
%{_libdir}/libtpd_DB.so
%{_libdir}/libtpd_parser.so
These files are unneeded (and should not be included) as discussed
above.
Please import 0.8.2-2 srpm.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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] 2006-10-12 13:42 EST --- Ah, sorry for misspelling.. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207782] Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207782 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 13:53 EST --- Yes, but is it a _blocker_ for this review? The points I'm trying to make are that (1) I'm rather confident that it works safely and correctly as it is currently packaged in -7, (2) I'm not 100% certain that what you suggest will work in all cases [how can we be certain?] and (3) what you suggest is a further deviation from the way upstream does things and therefore it should be done cautiously. So, I prefer to leave it as-is. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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] 2006-10-12 13:58 EST --- Sorry, thanks for notifying it to me. however the build server sounds down !! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207782] Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: itpp - C++ library for math, signal/speech processing, and communications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207782 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 14:04 EST --- (In reply to comment #47) Yes, but is it a _blocker_ for this review? The points I'm trying to make are that (1) I'm rather confident that it works safely and correctly as it is currently packaged in -7, It is true. (2) I'm not 100% certain that what you suggest will work in all cases [how can we be certain?] As I explained, since linkage is now correct and header files are consistent, the external linkage should not be necessary. (3) what you suggest is a further deviation from the way upstream does things and therefore it should be done cautiously. Well, please report this argument to upstream. Anyway it is recommended (I think) that the maintainer in Fedora and upstream has good connection. So, I prefer to leave it as-is. Okay. Then for now I don't block this any longer. This package (itpp) is now 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 206871] Review Request: ekg2 - Multi-protocol instant messaging and chat 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: ekg2 - Multi-protocol instant messaging and chat client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206871 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 14:19 EST --- I get following error: błąd: Znaleziono zainstalowane (ale niespakietowane) pliki: /usr/lib64/ekg2/plugins/readline.so /usr/lib64/ekg2/plugins/rot13.so /usr/share/ekg2/plugins/readline/vars-pl.tx -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208208] Review Request: MegaMek - a portable, network-enabled BattleTech 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: MegaMek - a portable, network-enabled BattleTech engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208208 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 16:00 EST --- Andrew: I don't see you on the list of sponsors. Since this is an inital package, a sponsor will need to approve it... You can find a list of sponsor folks here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/dump- group.cgi?group=cvsextrasrole_type=sponsorformat=html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177584] Review Request: zaptel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 16:09 EST --- Spec: http://repo.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.4/fedora/development/SRPMS/zaptel-1.4.0-0.fc6.beta1.spec SRPM: http://repo.ocjtech.us/asterisk-1.4/fedora/development/SRPMS/zaptel-1.4.0-0.fc6.beta1.src.rpm OK, here's a SRPM updated to the latest 1.4 beta, without any dependencies on a kmod 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 177584] Review Request: zaptel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177584 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177583 | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 16:11 EST --- Dropping the dependency on bug #177583 since it's likely that the Zaptel kernel modules will someday become a part of the kernel 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 177583] Review Request: zaptel-kmod
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zaptel-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177583 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177584 | 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 210025] Review Request: openpbx - The truly open source PBX
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openpbx - The truly open source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210025 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 16:14 EST --- I've created a userland/library only zaptel SRPM - see bug #177584 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Keywords|Reopened| Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 16:19 EST --- I'm very very sorry. Rawhide build of filesystem is what I expected, but my local (mock) build of filesystem is the opposite - just everything I claimed in comment #27. No matter what went wrong, but this is another thing. Bill and Rex, thank you very much for doing the job and adding the directories to filesystem package :) Finally I'm pointing to rpm = 4.4.6, which helped me to figger out this issue. For me this bug report was just another (daily) example why Fedora Core should be definitely upgraded to a current rpm release. But looks like Jesse and Seth etc. are not interested in such enhancements, otherwise they and others would have tested it and they wouldn't argue against such really useful things... -- 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 210553] New: Review Request: xerces-c - Validating XML Parser
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=210553 Summary: Review Request: xerces-c - Validating XML Parser 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://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SPECS/xerces-c.spec SRPM URL: http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SRPMS/xerces-c-2.7.0-0.src.rpm Description: Xerces-C is a validating XML parser written in a portable subset of C++. Xerces-C makes it easy to give your application the ability to read and write XML data. A shared library is provided for parsing, generating, manipulating, and validating XML documents. Xerces-C is faithful to the XML 1.0 recommendation and associated standards ( DOM 1.0, DOM 2.0. SAX 1.0, SAX 2.0, Namespaces). This spec-file based on work of Ralf Corsepius and Dag Wieers. I have something to discuss: there are samples in devel-package. Maybe it would be better to move 'em to the doc-package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210025] Review Request: openpbx - The truly open source PBX
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openpbx - The truly open source PBX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210025 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 16:42 EST --- Until you switch to building from a released tarball you should probably BR libtool, automake, and autoconf. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210553] Review Request: xerces-c - Validating XML Parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xerces-c - Validating XML Parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210553 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 16:47 EST --- If the samples are what I think they are, they're arch specific executables and thus at least can't be installed in /usr/share. In my local package, I put them in a -samples subpackage and /usr/bin. Here's my SRPM for cross checking purposes, feel free to grab if you find something useful in it: http://cachalot.mine.nu/6/SRPMS/xerces-c-2.7.0-0.3.cmn6.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 206814] Review Request: hugin - Frontend for Panorama Tools, similar to PTAssembler, PTGui or Open for Windows
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hugin - Frontend for Panorama Tools, similar to PTAssembler, PTGui or Open for Windows https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=206814 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 17:13 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) I'll ask upstream what the situation is with all the .la libraries that get statically linked. Upstream says that the static libs are just the way the code is structured internally. They are not intended to be exported, which is why shared libraries are not built. The exception is the the vigra code, this is a modified fork. Upstream has submitted these changes to the vigra maintainer and expects that they will be in the next release, at which point this code will be removed from hugin. Note that I already built vigra for extras but vigra has a very long release cycle. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210187] Review Request: libassa - C++ Object-Oriented network library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libassa - C++ Object-Oriented network library Alias: libassa https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210187 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||libassa --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 17:15 EST --- Michael, thanks for your comments. I have made all of the recommended modifications, rebuilt the package on my local system and verified that it at least builds and installs with no errors. Please, find the latest version of the spec file, assa-3.4.2-2.spec, at the aforementioned Spec URL. thanks for your detailed comments, -Vlad -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208208] Review Request: MegaMek - a portable, network-enabled BattleTech 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: MegaMek - a portable, network-enabled BattleTech engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208208 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-12 18:51 EST --- (In reply to comment #20) Andrew: I don't see you on the list of sponsors. Since this is an inital package, a sponsor will need to approve it... Yeah, I realized this after I went through 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 210117] Review Request: perl-aliased - Use shorter versions of class names
Please 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-aliased - Use shorter versions of class names https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210117 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-10-13 01:44 EST --- Imported and built for devel. Branch request for FC-5... 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
