[Bug 216785] Review Request: perl-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities
Please 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-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216785 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 03:01 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) Does that be a blocker? I just found a reference: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=166252 ... so people seem to preferr to ignore 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 216734] Review Request: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration 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: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216734 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 04:11 EST --- I installed this package but when i tried to run it, i got bug report. Is am i missing anything on my FC6? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216734] Review Request: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration 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: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216734 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 04:26 EST --- Created an attachment (id=141886) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=141886action=view) bug report -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216785] Review Request: perl-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities
Please 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-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216785 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 04:27 EST --- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and but NOT for RPMS. But those warnings are ignored. + source files match upstream. 66578c2ffaebbe035a0735e65ad71c3f Gnome2-Print-1.000.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. License text included in package. + %doc is small; no -doc subpackage required. + %doc does not affect runtime. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists + no .la files. + no translations are available + Dose owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Followed perl packaging guidelines. 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 216785] Review Request: perl-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities
Please 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-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216785 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 04:31 EST --- Don't Forget to CLOSE this with 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 215224] Review Request: gtk-murrine-engine - Murrine GTK2 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: gtk-murrine-engine - Murrine GTK2 engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215224 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 08:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #17) Splitting is not unnecessary, you should reconsider this issue. It will avoid to update the whole package when either one of the theme or the engine gets updated. Others gtk-engines packaged in Extras do the same. Agree. Does this mean I need to package the themes in another SRPM and submit it for 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 215224] Review Request: gtk-murrine-engine - Murrine GTK2 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: gtk-murrine-engine - Murrine GTK2 engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215224 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 08:19 EST --- Another issue is, themes have no version number and usually they are updated when the engine is updated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 188138] Review Request: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_auth_ntlm_winbind - NTLM authentication for the Apache web server using winbind daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188138 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 09:23 EST ---
Well;
1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines :
* Use rpmlint
- Rpmlint is not silent.
---
//usr/share/applications/fedora-gliv.desktop: warning:
Categories values must be one of snip
(found Application)
//usr/share/applications/fedora-gliv.desktop: warning:
Categories values must be one of snip
(found X-Red-Hat-Base)
---
The category 'Application' and 'X-Red-Hat-Base' is no
longer used (since desktop-file-utils 0.11) and this
should be removed.
NOTE: These warnings can be seem only in FC-devel.
* Documentation
---
%doc %{_mandir}/man1/gliv.1*
%doc %{_mandir}/*/man1/gliv.1*
--
- man manual files should not be marked as %doc.
* Why the %makeinstall macro should not be used
- Don't use %makeinstall macro as this is known to be broken.
* Scriptlets requirements:
Please check
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets
* desktop-database
- fedora-gliv.desktop has MimeType and this requires
'update-desktop-database'.
2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
* The sources as provided in the spec URL
[EMAIL PROTECTED] gliv]$ LANG=C wget -N
http://guichaz.free.fr/gliv/gliv-1.9.6.tar.bz2
--23:19:24-- http://guichaz.free.fr/gliv/gliv-1.9.6.tar.bz2
Resolving guichaz.free.fr... 212.27.63.100
Connecting to guichaz.free.fr|212.27.63.100|:80... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 404 Not Found
23:19:25 ERROR 404: Not Found.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 10:06 EST ---
(In reply to comment #4)
Well;
1. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines :
* Use rpmlint
- Rpmlint is not silent.
Fixed.
* Documentation
---
%doc %{_mandir}/man1/gliv.1*
%doc %{_mandir}/*/man1/gliv.1*
--
- man manual files should not be marked as %doc.
Done.
* Why the %makeinstall macro should not be used
- Don't use %makeinstall macro as this is known to be broken.
Fixed.
2. From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines :
* The sources as provided in the spec URL
Fixed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 10:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) --- //usr/share/applications/fedora-gliv.desktop: warning: Categories values must be one of snip (found Application) //usr/share/applications/fedora-gliv.desktop: warning: Categories values must be one of snip (found X-Red-Hat-Base) --- The category 'Application' and 'X-Red-Hat-Base' is no longer used (since desktop-file-utils 0.11) and this should be removed. NOTE: These warnings can be seem only in FC-devel. Which cateories should I use in this case? * Scriptlets requirements: Please check http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets * desktop-database - fedora-gliv.desktop has MimeType and this requires 'update-desktop-database'. Done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 10:34 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) (In reply to comment #4) The category 'Application' and 'X-Red-Hat-Base' is no longer used (since desktop-file-utils 0.11) and this should be removed. NOTE: These warnings can be seem only in FC-devel. Which cateories should I use in this case? Categories should be: Categories=GNOME;Graphics; I forgot one more comment. --- Icon=redhat-graphics.png --- This is incorrect because redhat-graphics.png is not installed by this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 10:46 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) Which cateories should I use in this case? Categories should be: Categories=GNOME;Graphics; OK. I forgot one more comment. --- Icon=redhat-graphics.png --- This is incorrect because redhat-graphics.png is not installed by this package. I changed it to: Icon=gliv.png Unfortunately (Fortunately!) I don't use pretty-looking modern software such as Gnome or KDE, so I can't check all that desktop stuff ) ver. 1.9.6-2 http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SPECS/gliv.spec http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SRPMS/gliv-1.9.6-1.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 216785] Review Request: perl-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities
Please 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-Gnome2-Print - Perl wrappers for the Gnome Print utilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216785 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 10:46 EST --- Imported and building for devel; branches requested for FC5,6. 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 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 10:46 EST --- Oops. http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SRPMS/gliv-1.9.6-2.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 215224] Review Request: gtk-murrine-engine - Murrine GTK2 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: gtk-murrine-engine - Murrine GTK2 engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215224 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 11:12 EST --- Well, * By the way, what is the license of the themes you included in srpm? Would you ask upstream about this? * Also, will you ask upsteam as of the update plan of themes? * Changelog: - version-release (0.31-4) and Changelog (0.31-3) is incoherent. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214893] Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214893 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 11:25 EST --- Any updates? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216105] Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable 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-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216105 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 11:44 EST --- Review == - package and spec file naming OK - package meets guidelines - license is MIT, matches spec - spec file written in English and is legible - sources match upstream - package builds OK in mock for FC4-Rawhide, i386 and x86_64 - BR's OK - no locale issues - no shared libraries - not relocatable - no directory ownership or permissions issues - %clean section present and correct - macro usage consistent enough - code, not content - docs aren't excessively large - docs don't affect runtime - no subpackages - no devel files present - not a GUI app, no desktop file needed - package seems to work OK (tested with bittorrent 5.0.1) MUSTFIX: * Include LICENSE as %doc PROBLEM: # rpm -qa python-twisted\* python-twisted-web-0.6.0-4.fc6 python-twisted-core-2.4.0-4.fc6 # rpm -e python-twisted-web Traceback (most recent call last): File /usr/libexec/twisted-dropin-cache, line 16, in ? list(getPlugins(IPlugin)) --- exception caught here --- File /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/plugin.py, line 214, in getPlugins adapted = interface(plugin, None) File /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/zope/interface/interface.py, line 658, in __call__ adapter = conform(self) File /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/plugin.py, line 77, in __conform__ return self.load() File /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/plugin.py, line 72, in load return namedAny(self.dropin.moduleName + '.' + self.name) File /usr/lib64/python2.4/site-packages/twisted/python/reflect.py, line 370, in namedAny obj = getattr(obj, n) exceptions.AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'twisted_web' I think that needs fixing. NOTES: * rpmlint output: E: python-twisted-web no-binary This is to be expected for what is essentially a noarch package that has to live in an arch-specific place due to the way python works, i.e. not an issue SUGGESTIONS: * URL should be: http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/wiki/TwistedWeb * Include NEWS as %doc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216912] New: Review Request: rtpproxy - A symmetric RTP proxy
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=216912 Summary: Review Request: rtpproxy - A symmetric RTP proxy 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://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/6/SRPMS/rtpproxy-0.3-1.fc6.spec SRPM URL: http://repo.ocjtech.us/misc/fedora/6/SRPMS/rtpproxy-0.3-1.fc6.src.rpm Description: This is a symmetric RTP proxy designed to be used in conjunction with the SIP Express Router (SER) or any other SIP proxy capable of rewriting SDP bodies in SIP messages that it processes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 12:22 EST --- Okay. - This package (gliv) 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 216916] New: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
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=216916 Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems 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://rpm.greysector.net/extras/arpack.spec SRPM URL: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/arpack-2.1-1.src.rpm Description: ARPACK is a collection of Fortran77 subroutines designed to solve large scale eigenvalue problems. The package is designed to compute a few eigenvalues and corresponding eigenvectors of a general n by n matrix A. It is most appropriate for large sparse or structured matrices A where structured means that a matrix-vector product w - Av requires order n rather than the usual order n**2 floating point operations. This software is based upon an algorithmic variant of the Arnoldi process called the Implicitly Restarted Arnoldi Method (IRAM). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 184530] Review Request: perl-RPM2
Please 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-RPM2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=184530 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 13:18 EST --- Turns out that there are/were a couple of existing bugs with this package. I haven't verified if they are still bugs with the latest version yet. bugzilla #73921 - packaging issue bugzilla #129724 - perl-RPM2 can't install multiple packages in a single transaction. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216534] Review Request: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition 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: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216534 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 13:26 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) In files, the de file could be marked as: %lang(de) %doc READMEde.txt Done. There is a gtk frontend, maybe it could be shipped in a sub-package? Done. There is a missing dependency on wish. I also think that maybe it could make sense to have gocr-tcl for gocr.tcl, because of that requires? Done. There are many Requires missing. At least (in pnm.c), gzip, bzip2, transfig, netpbm-progs, libjpeg Maybe upstream could use convert... I'm wondering whether to make these hard Requires or not. Obviously you need some to get extra functionality, but only for the image types you need to process. Perhaps just a note in the description? The problem at the moment with using convert is that you would need a command like: convert file pnm:-, but the code expects to append the filename to the end of the command. The more I look at the code, the less I like it, but I suppose it's developing and may be useful. Just need the new spec file: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/gocr.spec http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/gocr-0.41-2.fc6.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 202528] Review Request: rt2x00-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: rt2x00-kmod https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=202528 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 13:36 EST --- FWIW, I have included a d80211 patch in my FC6 test kernels: http://people.redhat.com/linville/kernels/fc6/ This is not directly related to packaging, but it might be interesting to anyone stumbling upon 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 215256] Review Request: firefox-32 - Alternate Launcher for 32bit Firefox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: firefox-32 - Alternate Launcher for 32bit Firefox https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215256 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 13:40 EST --- http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/firefox-32-0.0.1-2.src.rpm http://togami.com/~warren/fedora/firefox-32.spec Changed the patch files into source files. I will just be careful when doing the import to check the source files in instead of putting them into the binary cache. I believe that was the only thing possible to fix in this package. So please either suggest further fixes or approve. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215165] Review Request: audacious-plugins - Plugins for the Audacious media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: audacious-plugins - Plugins for the Audacious media player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215165 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 13:42 EST --- It's at the same place all the other versions were, posted several times though this review. I thought that was kind of evident. http://www.skytale.net/files/audacious/audacious-plugins-1.2.2-0.8.sky.src.rpm http://www.skytale.net/files/audacious/audacious-plugins.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 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 13:50 EST --- God: + Source package was not complainted by rpmlint. * Local build works fine. * Rpmlint is quited on binary packages. * Local install/uninstall workds ok. * Tarball matches with upstream. * Mock build works fine. Bad: - Devel package should contains some documentation for developers. I thins, that the stuff on /usr/doc/arpack-2.1/EXAMPLES shold be in the developement package. - Rpmlint complaints on installed package: rpmlint arpack W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 etime_ W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 slamch_ W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 cgemv_ W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 cscal_ --- A lot of simular lines --- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198562] Review Request: zabbix - Open-source monitoring solution for your IT infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: zabbix - Open-source monitoring solution for your IT infrastructure https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198562 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 13:55 EST --- Imported and built for devel, FC6 and FC5. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209260] Review Request: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management 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: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209260 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 14:11 EST --- (In reply to comment #17) Whoops, yes, been meaning to address that, its still on my todo list. I need to dig up a high(er) resolution beryl icon and throw it in there. I found beryl .svg icon here: http://tinyurl.com/y6xg3e and it seems to me that it may come in useful :) (In reply to comment #17) I also still need to look into the po/mo files being created... I have checked it and I found that: * tr_TR is Turkish * gl_ES is Gallegan (Spain) * sk_SK is Slovakian * sv_FI is Swedish (Finland) These languages dirs without doubt should be owned by another packages, but (I checked it) they aren't. ar_AR is probably Arabic but no idea what my_MY 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 214893] Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sipp - SIP test tool / traffic generator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214893 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 14:12 EST --- Yes, there are some. First, I updated packate to version 1.1rc6. So far I faced the correct numbering problem - 1.1rc6 isn't a correct name. Should we name it in some different manner, for example 1.1-0.rc6.1? Another one thing worth to mention is a clause in LICENSE.txt. Looks like some part of package distributed covered by different license (BSD variant?). I added another two BR: openssl-devel and libpcap-devel (they're significantly increase functionality, for example digest authentication in scenarios). Another one add-on is patch which fixes this package's buildscripts. http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SPECS/sipp.spec http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SRPMS/sipp-1.1rc6-0.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 216755] Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: GLiv - OpenGL image viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216755 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 14:15 EST --- Thanks. Successfully built in FE-Devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209260] Review Request: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management 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: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209260 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 14:33 EST --- (In reply to comment #18) I have checked it and I found that: * tr_TR is Turkish tr_TR is for turkish but the translation catalogs for turkish is named tr and installed under /usr/share/locale/tr/ which is owned by filesystem rpm. I guess xx_XX should be renamed to xx and for other translation catalogs directories should be owned. But I'm not sure about the standards of this naming scheme as filesystem installs both fr and fr_FR directories (although on my system only beryl/emerald packages consume the latter). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209260] Review Request: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management 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: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209260 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 14:42 EST --- Just pushed a new beryl-manager build with a desktop file added, still need to address the lang stuff. I noticed the same thing -- that some of the xx_XX ones looked like they could simply be renamed to xx, but not sure what's up with the others. Looks like I'll need to talk with the owner of filesystem and/or our translation folks... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216947] New: Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Notify - Gtk2::Notify Perl module
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=216947 Summary: Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Notify - Gtk2::Notify Perl module Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Gtk2-Notify/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Gtk2-Notify-0.02-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Gtk2-Notify.spec Description: Perl bindings to libnotify. This module will allow one to use the notify functionality from within a perl application. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216947] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Notify - Gtk2::Notify Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Notify - Gtk2::Notify Perl module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216947 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||163776 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216285] Review Request: kleansweep - Reclaim disk space by finding unneeded 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: kleansweep - Reclaim disk space by finding unneeded files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216285 [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 216284] Review Request: dd2 - Dodgin' Diamond 2 - Shoot'em up arcade game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: dd2 - Dodgin' Diamond 2 - Shoot'em up arcade game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216284 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 15:24 EST --- Thanks for the review and the NVidea headsup! Imported and build, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216947] Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Notify - Gtk2::Notify Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Gtk2-Notify - Gtk2::Notify Perl module https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216947 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 15:24 EST --- Tests now conditionalized -- they tend to die horribly under mock due to the lack of $DISPLAY. SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Gtk2-Notify-0.02-2.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-Gtk2-Notify.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 191218] Review Request: PyScript - Postscript graphics with 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: PyScript - Postscript graphics with Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=191218 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 15:50 EST --- Kevin, Thanks for your comments, and many apologies for not having replied sooner. To be totally honest I didn't know what to say, and have only just got around to cleaning up my inbox. Basically, what I would like to do is to get PyScript into FedoraExtras but not necessarily be the actual maintainer of the package, rather stay the upstream author. Is there another way to do this other than getting sponsored? It would be fantastic to get the package into Fedora so that more people have access to the package. Is it possible to find someone else who already packages similar software for FedoraExtras who would be able to perfom this role? Thanks heaps in advance, Paul -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209260] Review Request: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management 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: beryl-manager - Beryl window decorator and theme management utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209260 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 16:21 EST --- (In reply to comment #20) Just pushed a new beryl-manager build with a desktop file added, still need to address the lang stuff. I noticed the same thing -- that some of the xx_XX ones looked like they could simply be renamed to xx, but not sure what's up with the others. It may be especially difficult with Swedish language, as there are Swedish Finland and Swedish Sweden language. In fact, I don't think the Swedish Finland is really needed ;) In my opinion these languages need to be updated in filesystem 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 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 16:45 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Bad: - Devel package should contains some documentation for developers. I thins, that the stuff on /usr/doc/arpack-2.1/EXAMPLES shold be in the developement package. Done, new specfile: http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/arpack.spec (SRPM unchanged) - Rpmlint complaints on installed package: It doesn't here (FC6). rpmlint arpack W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 etime_ W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 slamch_ W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 cgemv_ W: arpack undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libarpack.so.2.1 cscal_ --- A lot of simular lines --- I have no idea what this is about. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 16:57 EST --- It seems to be a duplicate of #214967 so it should certainly be better to add a comment on that report. The symbols look like lapack symbols. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 16:58 EST --- Scratch that, I have an idea now. Stay tuned. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:01 EST --- Aw, crap. I forgot about #214967. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215444] Review Request: netcdf-perl Perl extension module for scientific data access via the netCDF API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: netcdf-perl Perl extension module for scientific data
access via the netCDF API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215444
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:16 EST ---
I am not sure about the name. Maybe you could add a virtual
Provides: perl-NetCDF = %{version}-%{release}
It is not obvious since there is already the perl(NetCDF)
provides.
I've just reread the naming guidelines, and it may be interpreted
as acceptable to keep netcdf-perl since it is not a CPAN module.
* Rpmlint output may be ignored:
W: netcdf-perl invalid-license NetCDF
W: netcdf-perl invalid-license NetCDF
W: netcdf-perl doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/netcdf-perl-1.2.3/test.pl
perl(strict)
W: netcdf-perl doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/netcdf-perl-1.2.3/test.pl
perl(warnings)
W: netcdf-perl doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/netcdf-perl-1.2.3/test.pl
/usr/bin/perl
W: netcdf-perl-debuginfo invalid-license NetCDF
* license is not OSI compatible, but upstream has agreed to
relicense using an OSI compatible license
* follow packaging guidelines
* source match upstream
936c91794d82ff8cfe2a955d4cad4c27 netcdf-perl-1.2.3.tar.Z
* sane provides (with the classical bogus NetCDF.so)
Provides: NetCDF.so perl(NetCDF)
* %files section right.
The naming is not obviously right, and not obviously wrong either,
so I won't make it a blocker. If other reviewer disagree we'll see
then, but in the meantime, it is
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 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:19 EST --- OK, non-weak symbol issue fixed. http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/arpack.spec http://rpm.greysector.net/extras/arpack-2.1-2.src.rpm I will ask Axel if he would consider letting me (co-)maintain this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214967] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214967 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:24 EST --- I forgot about this and submitted this package for review in #bug 216916 myself, sorry. Axel, would you consider letting me maintain this or at least co-maintain? Here's a patch to fix undefined-non-weak-symbols rpmlint warning. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214967] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214967 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:26 EST --- Created an attachment (id=141957) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=141957action=view) Fix undefined-non-weak-symbols rpmlint warning and add license text to 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 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:27 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 214967 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214967] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214967 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:27 EST --- *** Bug 216916 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215444] Review Request: netcdf-perl Perl extension module for scientific data access via the netCDF API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: netcdf-perl Perl extension module for scientific data access via the netCDF API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215444 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:28 EST --- Added the provides perl-NetCDF. Imported and built on devel. Added to owners.list. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215445] Review Request: netcdf-decoder Converts WMO GRIB products into NetCDF 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: netcdf-decoder Converts WMO GRIB products into NetCDF files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215445 Bug 215445 depends on bug 215444, which changed state. Bug 215444 Summary: Review Request: netcdf-perl Perl extension module for scientific data access via the netCDF API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215444 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216534] Review Request: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition 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: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216534 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 17:52 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) There are many Requires missing. At least (in pnm.c), gzip, bzip2, transfig, netpbm-progs, libjpeg I'm wondering whether to make these hard Requires or not. Obviously you need some to get extra functionality, but only for the image types you need to process. Perhaps just a note in the description? It depends how it fails. But given what those deps are, except maybe for transfig, I can't see why they couldn't be hard requires. png, jpeg, gif and eps support seems to be a must to me. I tested a bit, but I get only segfaults on non pnm files (tried png and eps): $ gocr ex.pcx Special chars: àá__åæç À Å Æ ß $Xgo ØØ44t¢µ Special chars= àáâãäåæç À Å Æ ß $XO_o øØ44 __µ Special chars : àáâăäåæç À Å _ _ G_#9o 0Ø44tµ $ convert ex.pcx ex.png $ gocr ex.png pngtopnm: warning - non-square pixels; to fix do a 'pamscale -yscale 4.28479' Erreur de segmentation $ gdb --args gocr ex.png (gdb) run Starting program: /usr/bin/gocr ex.png pngtopnm: warning - non-square pixels; to fix do a 'pamscale -yscale 4.28479' Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x00aebf18 in pnm_readpaminit () from /usr/lib/libnetpbm.so.10 (gdb) bt #0 0x00aebf18 in pnm_readpaminit () from /usr/lib/libnetpbm.so.10 #1 0x080a0560 in readpgm (name=0xbfbc6a06 ex.png, p=0xbfbbc2cc, vvv=0) at pnm.c:149 #2 0x080493b9 in main (argn=2, argv=0xbfbc5464) at gocr.c:272 #3 0x0082ce5c in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 #4 0x08048e01 in _start () With gziped or bzip2ed files, things are not better: $ gzip ex.pcx $ gocr ex.pcx.gz ERROR pcx.c L28: no ZSoft sign Another issue is that in gocr.tcl, the show button seems to invoke a program which isn't installed. There is an error with couldn't execute xli: no such file or directory similarly with spell couldn't execute tkispell: no such file or directory and with scan it starts xsane, so there is a missing dependency. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214830] Review Request: Limph - PHP network host monitor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: Limph - PHP network host monitor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214830
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 18:36 EST ---
Created an attachment (id=141960)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=141960action=view)
patch to spec file
Here's a patch that resolves some issues.
To fix the tar ball issue:
%setup -q -n %{name}
Then go back to %setup -q when you fix that.
Other issues:
- still got some config files in /usr. See my earlier suggestion about maybe
having them include the password information from a common file in /etc/limph.
- tmp dir is still wrong. Do you really need your own tmp dir? Can't be in
/usr in any case.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214967] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214967 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 18:59 EST --- Thanks for the lapack patch and of course for the troublesome license inclusion, I'll bump the release tag and add a changelog entry like %changelog * Thu Nov 23 2006 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski hidden-for-bugzilla-scrapers - 2.1-5 - Fix missing lapack dependencies. - Add RiceBSD license text. No problem with comaintaining. Let's hope that packages makes it through the license barrier, e.g. the authors grant a different license than the current one (thanks to Quentin for picking this up). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216534] Review Request: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition 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: gocr - GNU Optical Character Recognition program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216534 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 19:00 EST --- Added Requires for those things we ship. We don't ship xli or tkispell though. So, change to equivalent apps we do ship or forget about them? Worry about the segfault, or just report 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 214967] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214967 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 19:14 EST --- Let's hope so! :) Another thing worth mentioning: I actually built arpack against atlas-devel, which provides an alternative lapack implementation, but since it doesn't provide lapack-devel, I decided to stick to lapack-devel. The user can replace lapack with atlas at install time. In fact, I wonder what yum will pick to satisfy lapack.so.3 dependency... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 207839] Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: lush - An object-oriented Lisp interpreter and compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=207839 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 19:15 EST --- Here is the latest version: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/6/i386/SRPMS.gemi/lush-1.2.1-1.fc6.src.rpm I fixed the compiler flags and some file permissions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 213902] Review Request: tclparser - Tcl syntax 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: tclparser - Tcl syntax parser Alias: tclparser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213902 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 20:10 EST --- ping? It's been almost 3 weeks since you assigned this review to yourself, but there hasn't been any activity yet. If you aren't able to do a review in the next couple of days then could you unassign yourself from this review so that someone else might take it over? The same goes for the related bugs 213904, 213905, and 213907. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 20:38 EST --- Re #21, that's one of the features mock removed when it forked off mach. With mach, you can ask it to build a set of spec files and it will figure out dependencies on its own. Anyway, still looking for a suggestion, if no suggestion in the next few days I will go with putting it in there. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216734] Review Request: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration 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: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216734 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 23:06 EST --- when i restart system i am repeatedly getting bug buddy reporting bugs again and again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 215165] Review Request: audacious-plugins - Plugins for the Audacious media player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: audacious-plugins - Plugins for the Audacious media player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215165 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 23:18 EST --- Thanks 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 216734] Review Request: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration 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: gnome-compiz-manager - compiz configuration utility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216734 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-22 23:20 EST --- Created an attachment (id=141968) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=141968action=view) This is bug report i got as soon as i restart system and gnome starts working -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216916] Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: arpack - Fortran77 subroutines for solving large scale eigenvalue problems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216916 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163776 | nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 208420] Review Request: conky - A system monitor for X originally based on the torsmo code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: conky - A system monitor for X originally based on the torsmo code https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=208420 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-23 01:59 EST --- I am waiting on this for the next release, since I submitted the last package they released a 1.4.4 and the word I got from the devs in IRC the other day was that 1.4.5 was coming soon cause of some other bugs that have been reported. I am not going to sub package the vim and nano syntax files. I was thinking of including them with the docs and the sample config; how does this sound?? Patrice, if you think the audacious.pc is buggy maybe I shouldnt build the package to support 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
