[Bug 217249] Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb Alias: atomorun https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217249 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-26 02:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > MUST FIX > - Add Requires: icons-hicolor-theme to pull in icons directory > /me stupid, doh New version with this fixed here: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/atomorun.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/atomorun-1.1-0.2.pre2.fc7.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 198836] Review Request: freetype1 compatibility FreeType 1.x
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freetype1 compatibility FreeType 1.x https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198836 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-26 02:08 EST --- Well rpmlint likes it, so I assume its a valid license, I took this from the spec initially created by the core freetype maintainer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217197] Review Request: MyBashBurn 1.0-1 - burn data and songs.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: MyBashBurn 1.0-1 - burn data and songs. Alias: MyBashBurn https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217197 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-26 02:04 EST --- the new files uploaded: Spec URL: http://www.fedora-ve.org/mybashburn/downloads/mybashburn.spec SRPM URL: http://www.fedora-ve.org/mybashburn/downloads/mybashburn-1.0-1.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 212715] Review Request: openvrml - VRML/X3D runtime 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: openvrml - VRML/X3D runtime library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212715 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-26 01:48 EST --- Please report any outstanding issues as new bugs. Also note my suggestion in comment #24. (And see bug 157279.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217197] Review Request: MyBashBurn 1.0-1 - burn data and songs.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: MyBashBurn 1.0-1 - burn data and songs.
Alias: MyBashBurn
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217197
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: MyBashBurn |Review Request: MyBashBurn
|0.1 - burn data and songs. |1.0-1 - burn data and songs.
OtherBugsDependingO||177841
nThis||
Alias||MyBashBurn
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-26 01:41 EST ---
okay, it's good to hear from you, just now added myself on FE-NEEDSPONSOR.
I'm uploading the new SRPM and SPEC files, note that i decided change this
initial release to 1.0-1 for compatibility with the PackagingGuidelines and
NamingGuidelines.
In the spec file the line install -c -m666 this is needed to that every user can
to do read-write operations, in next realease i think to split it into of
program in some as: ~/.bashburnrc
CREDITS and HOWTO are duplicate as on %{doc} as %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name}
In %{doc} for compatibility with the guidelines
In %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name} why the program need read it 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 211728] Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211728 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-26 01:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) > Clean in mock and rpmlint Not clean outside of mock: # rpmbuild -ba stklos.spec ... gcc -shared -o gtklos.so gtk-glue.o gtk-canvas.o gtk-cont.o gtk-editable.o gtk-image.o gtk-label.o gtk-misc.o gtk-list.o gtk-signal.o gtk-event.o gtk-menu.o \ -rdynamic -L/usr/lib -lgdk_pixbuf -lgtk -lgdk -lgmodule -lglib -ldl -lXi -lXext -lX11 -lm -lgnomecanvaspixbuf /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lgnomecanvaspixbuf > as for the .h file. They need to be in a devel file. If another package needs > them to build, drag in the devel package and not the main one. > > Feel free to discuss it on the extras list, but I have a feeling it's probably > not worth it for adding in the devel package. Moving them into a *-devel package is a MUST. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217256] Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217256 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 23:03 EST --- I had a look at this package. Though rpmlint is silent i found /usr/share/doc/alsa-tools-1.0.12 directory is orphaned -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217262] New: Review Request: tdom - DOM parser for Tcl
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=217262 Summary: Review Request: tdom - DOM parser for Tcl Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/tdom.spec SRPM URL: http://www.kobold.org/~wart/fedora/tdom-0.8.0-1.src.rpm Description: DOM parser for Tcl There is another package, tcldom, that provides similar functionality, but with a different API. Some Tcl applications are written for one Tcl DOM api or the other, so it would be good to include both in FE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216723] Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 22:09 EST --- Now its looking better. rpmlints are silent now. More (unofficial)review will do later on. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217256] Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217256 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216723] Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216723 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163776, 177841 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 21:51 EST --- Moving this package status from FE-REVIEW to FE-NEW. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217259] Review Request: alsa-firmware - Firmware for several ALSA-supported sound card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-firmware - Firmware for several ALSA-supported sound card https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217259 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:49 EST --- NB that alsa-tools-firmware (needed to push the firmware for some of the things in this package) is a subpackage of alsa-tools; see bug #217256 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217256] Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217256 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:48 EST --- Firmware is over in bug #217259 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217259] Review Request: alsa-firmware - Firmware for several ALSA-supported sound card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-firmware - Firmware for several ALSA-supported sound card https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217259 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:47 EST --- adding cc's from bug #186858 which this bug obsoletes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 213907] Review Request: tclpro - Tcl debugging environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclpro - Tcl debugging environment Alias: tclpro https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213907 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:47 EST --- Imported and built. 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 213907] Review Request: tclpro - Tcl debugging environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclpro - Tcl debugging environment Alias: tclpro https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213907 Bug 213907 depends on bug 213905, which changed state. Bug 213905 Summary: Review Request: tcldebugger - Tcl debugging library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213905 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 213905] Review Request: tcldebugger - Tcl debugging 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: tcldebugger - Tcl debugging library Alias: tcldebugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213905 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:46 EST --- Imported and built. 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 217259] New: Review Request: alsa-firmware - Firmware for several ALSA-supported sound card
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=217259 Summary: Review Request: alsa-firmware - Firmware for several ALSA-supported sound card Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/alsa-firmware.spec SRPM URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/alsa-firmware-1.0.12-1.src.rpm Description: This package contains the firmware binaries for a number of sound cards. Some (but not all of these) require firmware loaders which are included in the alsa-tools-firmware package alsa-firmware has not been in Fedora since Fedora.us days, even though it is absolutely vital to make some soundcards usable. There are several possible issues: 1. licensing/distribution 2. compliance with Guidelines Let's take (1) first. Thorsten did a bit of background research on this and summarised in a private mail on 2 June 2006: == I took a closer look at the latest upstream package at ftp://ftp.alsa-project.org/pub/firmware/alsa-firmware-1.0.11.tar.bz2 It contains a file COPYING in the root with the GPL. And a README with --- LICENSE AND COPYRIGHT = The files contained in this package is regarded as the example data for each alsa-tools program. Hence, their copyright and license follow basically to the definition of alsa-tools programs. The detailed license and copyright is found in README of each subdirectory. --- alsa-tools contains a lot of license files with the GPL (and once LGPL). Most subdirs contains README files with terms like --- COPYRIGHT = Copyright (c) 2003 Digigram SA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Distributable under GPL. --- or --- COPYRIGHT = Copyright (c) RME Distributable under GPL. --- or --- COPYRIGHT = tascam_loader.ihx, tascam_loader.asm and an2131.asm: Available under GPL without restrictions. other firmware files: Copyright (c) 2003 Tascam / TEAC Corporation. Distributable under GPL. == This still stands with 1.0.12. So it appears to meet the requirements for Binary Firmware in the Guidelines. (It is also distributed with a number of other distros including Mandriva and OpenSUSE) 2. spot and Thorsten did some work with "file" to see if it met the requirement for "no executables". The most interesting one was: ./lib/firmware/mixart/miXart8.elf: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, PowerPC or cisco 4500, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, not stripped Now this does appear to really be an ELF binary, but it is not +x and it doesn't appear to run on Linux: $ chmod +x miXart8.elf $ ./miXart8.elf bash: ./miXart8.elf: cannot execute binary file so I think we can say that is truly is firmware, and it just happens that this device uses a piece of firmware in ELF format. a "file $(find . -type f) | grep -v -e ASCII -e Bourne -e shell" also throws up some other bits that aren't "data" like: ./lib/firmware/digiface_firmware.bin: DOS executable (device driver) ./lib/firmware/digiface_firmware_rev11.bin: DOS executable (device driver) ./lib/firmware/ea/3g_asic.fw: PGP encrypted data but these appear to just be "file" noise. They appear to be genuine firmware, that's not executed on the host, so they should be fine. (and 3g_asic is not PGP data; that's just what happens when you chuck lots of random stuff at "file"). Last CVS from fedora.us days, which is largely unchanged here: http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/*checkout*/rpms/alsa-firmware/FC-5/alsa-firmware.spec?root=extras&rev=1.5 Package is listed on: http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/PackagesNoLongerInDevel?highlight=%28alsa-firmware%28 as "pending legal review" but there appears to be nothing happening and nobody tasked to do anything AFAICT. Given the above details, in the absence of a compelling reason, I don't see why this shouldn't be included in Fedora. I'm looking to spot here to make a call or, if some kind of legal review really is needed, make this block FE-LEGAL and get someone's attention about it. Note that I only have one piece of hardware that this firmware supports (Echo Audio Indigo DJ) so any feedback from anyone else welcome. I have marked the package as "noarch"; since it's containing firmware it should be. However, given that the firmware is "compiled" from big strings and there's some fiddly stuff going on, I would appreciate some md5sums of the generated firmware from someone with ppc/x86_64 architectures just to
[Bug 213907] Review Request: tclpro - Tcl debugging environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclpro - Tcl debugging environment Alias: tclpro https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213907 Bug 213907 depends on bug 213904, which changed state. Bug 213904 Summary: Review Request: tclchecker - Tcl syntax checker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213904 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 213904] Review Request: tclchecker - Tcl syntax checker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclchecker - Tcl syntax checker Alias: tclchecker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213904 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:45 EST --- Imported and built. 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 213904] Review Request: tclchecker - Tcl syntax checker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclchecker - Tcl syntax checker Alias: tclchecker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213904 Bug 213904 depends on bug 213902, which changed state. Bug 213902 Summary: Review Request: tclparser - Tcl syntax parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213902 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 213905] Review Request: tcldebugger - Tcl debugging 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: tcldebugger - Tcl debugging library Alias: tcldebugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213905 Bug 213905 depends on bug 213902, which changed state. Bug 213902 Summary: Review Request: tclparser - Tcl syntax parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213902 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 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:44 EST --- Thanks for following up on this, and thanks for the review! Imported and built, 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 217256] Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217256 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 20:20 EST --- Note that the subpackage alsa-tools-firmware is disabled by default; this is pending the alsa-firmware package which I am going to submit separately. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217256] New: Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA
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=217256 Summary: Review Request: alsa-tools - Specialist tools for ALSA Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: normal Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/specs/alsa-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://www.timj.co.uk/linux/srpms/alsa-tools-1.0.12-1.src.rpm Description: This package contains several specialist tools for use with ALSA, including a number of programs that provide access to special hardware facilities on certain sound cards. alsa-tools was previously built in FE and maintained by Thorsten Leemhuis. Then, Andreas Bierfert took ownership but never actually committed any changes. I tried to contact Andreas on 5 Nov 06 but have had no reply; he appears to be AWOL. I am therefore submitting an updated package for new review; if OK then I will unorphan alsa-tools. This package is almost entirely unchanged from the previous FE one other than a version update and some text changes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 198836] Review Request: freetype1 compatibility FreeType 1.x
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: freetype1 compatibility FreeType 1.x https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=198836 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 18:45 EST --- Sorry for the delay - had all sorts of problems at this end. rpmlint - clean on all package (non main packages have no docs warnings, ignore) mock - clean REVIEW License - is BSD-like a valid type? Consistent use of macros Spec in UTF-8, US English, Clear No permission / ownership issues Contains documentation (see above) Contains reason for not using smp_make Removes .la files MD5s match for the tarballs Contains clean, pre and postuns No RPM dep issues If you can confirm that BSD-like is a valid license, I'm happy. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216131] Review Request: glest-data - Data files for the game Glest
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: glest-data - Data files for the game Glest Alias: glest-data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216131 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 18:44 EST --- > - Why do you include SOURCE1 (glest-get-translations.sh) but do not install > it? It is the script I used to make the translations tarball (SOURCE2). I included it for transparency, in case someone wants to know where SOURCE2 comes from and verify it. > - Change permissions on SOURCE1 to 755 Done. This is ususally harmless since it's the src.rpm (and the script is not installed in the build root) > - Add empty %build with a comment saying nothing to build I don't think this is a real problem. If rpmbuild accepts the spec file, then the %build section is optional. If it is optional, it's probably for a reason, and I think NoArch packages are why. > - data looks like it is not licensed as GPL. Please clarify with upstream Exact, the licence tag is wrong. The data files are "distributable". However, this complies with the Fedora Guidelines : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shareware Game content is allowed as long as it is distributable. On top of that, one of glest's main features is that it can be easily modified because the data files are XML. So I'm pretty sure you're allowed to modify it. I've already contacted upstream to ask them to clarify if the content may be modified. I'm still waiting for the reply, and I'll update the licence tag when I get it. > - add punctuation to description Done. New release : http://gauret.free.fr/fichiers/rpms/fedora/glest-data-2.0.0-2.src.rpm (give it a few minutes to upload) 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 211728] Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211728 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 18:31 EST --- Clean in mock and rpmlint as for the .h file. They need to be in a devel file. If another package needs them to build, drag in the devel package and not the main one. Feel free to discuss it on the extras list, but I have a feeling it's probably not worth it for adding in the devel 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 217229] Review Request: libmpd - Music Player Daemon 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: libmpd - Music Player Daemon library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217229 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 18:20 EST --- No problem. If it has the proper "Requires" in CVS, just go ahead and build 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 211728] Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211728 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 18:10 EST --- There is a new release: http://math.ifi.unizh.ch/fedora/6/i386/SRPMS.gemi/stklos-0.80-1.fc6.src.rpm However, I think we disagree about packaging the .h files. I don't want to separate them from the main package, since this would break installing extensions that need to be compiled. If we don't come to an agreement, we probably have to discuss this on the fedora-extras list. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:31 EST --- Sorry about the lag, I've had all hells problems at this end (ranging from death of my buildsys due to a virus called XP to trying to get a job)... rpmlint clean mock clean Review License fine Consistent use of macros No permission or ownership problems Includes docs US English, clear, UTF 8 spec file As with the others, the date is a tad old (my fault for the delay), but it looks okay. 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 213905] Review Request: tcldebugger - Tcl debugging 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: tcldebugger - Tcl debugging library Alias: tcldebugger https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213905 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:26 EST --- rpmlint clean (src and noarch) mock builds cleanly Review Valid license Spec in UTF 8, clear and US English No permissions or ownership problems Includes docs Consistent use of macros 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 217229] Review Request: libmpd - Music Player Daemon 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: libmpd - Music Player Daemon library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217229 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:22 EST --- Sorry. I just saw that you changed the blocker bug to FE-REVIEW. Unfortunately I already imported it because I thought it was FE-ACCEPT. I will not request a build before you change it to FE-ACCEPT. Really sorry. I have updated the package in the CVS to include Requires: pkgconfig in the -devel package. Hope it is alright 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 213904] Review Request: tclchecker - Tcl syntax checker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tclchecker - Tcl syntax checker Alias: tclchecker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213904 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:22 EST --- rpmlint results src.rpm - clear noarch.rpm - clear mock builds cleanly installs fine Review Spec file clear, uses UTF-8, US English No permission issues Docs included Consistent use of macros No problems with rpm deps No ownership issues 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 217249] Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb Alias: atomorun https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217249 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:02 EST --- > Shouldn't it be hicolor-icon-theme? ;) ya probably :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217249] Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb Alias: atomorun https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:01 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > MUST FIX > - Add Requires: icons-hicolor-theme to pull in icons directory > Shouldn't it be hicolor-icon-theme? ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 17:01 EST --- The import was stalled for a few days due to the CVS outage, it was then imported and now we are waiting for branches for FC-5 and FC-6: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/CVSSyncNeeded The bug will be closed once it's built etc. Thanks for keeping an eye on this 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 217249] Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an
exploding nuclear bomb
Alias: atomorun
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217249
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 16:53 EST ---
REVIEW CHECKLIST
- rpmlint output clean
- package named according to package naming guidelines
- spec file name matches %{name}
- package meets packaging guidelines
- package licensed with open source compatible license
- license matches actual license
- license included in %doc
- spec written in American english
- spec legible
- sources match upstream
41522a330c0da7c6e79c46baa2c1d8c3 atomorun-1.1_pre2.tar.gz
- package successfully compiles and builds on FC6 x86_64
- all build dependencies listed in BR
- no locales
- no shared libraries
- package is not relocatable
- package owns all directories it creates
X package uses a directory which is not pulled in from Requires
- no duplicates in %files
- file permissions set properly
- spec contains proper %clean section
- macro usage is consistent
- package contains code
- no large documentation
- %doc does not affect runtime
- no header files or static libraries
- no pkgconfig files
- no devel subpackage required
- no .la files
- GUI app contains proper .desktop file
- package does not own files or directories owned by other packages
MUST FIX
- Add Requires: icons-hicolor-theme to pull in icons directory
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 211728] Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: stklos - Scheme Interpreter/Compiler System https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=211728 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 16:53 EST --- ping! Anything happening on 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 204700] Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: njb-sharp - C# bindings to libnjb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204700 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 16:48 EST --- This package has been approved. Please close the bug and import (if you haven't already) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217249] Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb Alias: atomorun https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| Alias||atomorun -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217249] New: Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb
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=217249 Summary: Review Request: atomorun - Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb 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://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/atomorun.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/atomorun-1.1-0.1.pre2.fc7.src.rpm Description: Atomorun is a OpenGL Jump&Run game where you have to flee an exploding nuclear bomb. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217239] Review Request: arrows - Neat little maze 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: arrows - Neat little maze game Alias: arrows https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217239 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 16:17 EST --- Thanks, imported and build, closing. p.s. scummvm is fine. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217239] Review Request: arrows - Neat little maze 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: arrows - Neat little maze game Alias: arrows https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217239 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 15:57 EST --- All MUST/SHOULD items fixed. Please re-check scummvm spec for icon issue mentioned here, I might have missed this on my review of scummvm. 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 216131] Review Request: glest-data - Data files for the game Glest
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: glest-data - Data files for the game Glest
Alias: glest-data
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216131
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 15:51 EST ---
REVIEW CHECKLIST
- rpmlint output:
W: glest-data strange-permission glest-get-translations.sh 0775
W: glest-data no-%build-section
You should add a %build with a comment explaining it is not needed
Change permissions of SOURCE1 to 755
Explain why you do not install SOURCE1
- package named according to package naming guidelines
- spec filename matches %{name}
- package meets packaging guidelines
- package licensed with open source compatible license
X license does not match actual license
This is confusing, it looks like the data has a seperate license which just says
its distributable, can you clarify this with upstream? I'm not sure this
qualifies as being open source compatible.
- license included in %doc
- spec written in American english
- spec legible
- source matches upstream
8b6902e82874011e768c64e20fbeead5 glest_data_2.0.0.zip
- package successfully compiles and builds on FC6 x86_64
- all build dependencies listed in BR
- no locales
- no shared libraries
- package is not relocatable
- package owns all directories it creates
- all other directories it uses are provided by Requries
- no duplicates in %files
- file permissions set properly
- package contains proper %clean section
- macro usage is consistent
- contains permissible content
- no large documentation
- files in %doc do not affect runtime
- no header files or static libraries
- no pkgconfig files
- no need for a devel subpackage
- no .la files
- not a GUI app needed a .desktop file
- package does not own files or directories owned by other packages
MUST FIX
- Why do you include SOURCE1 (glest-get-translations.sh) but do not install it?
- Change permissions on SOURCE1 to 755
- Add empty %build with a comment saying nothing to build
- data looks like it is not licensed as GPL. Please clarify with upstream
- add punctuation to description
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217239] Review Request: arrows - Neat little maze 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: arrows - Neat little maze game Alias: arrows https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217239 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 15:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > MUST FIX > - Shouldn't this require some package to get the icon dir? If not, please > tell > me how I determine which Requires would pull this in. Perhaps Require: > gnome-icon-theme? Or hicolor-icon-theme if you decide to move this out of the > GNOME menu (see SHOULD FIX section). > Yes it should have a "Requires: hicolor-icon-theme", my bad , fixed. > SHOULD FIX > - I'm not sure I agree all games compiled with gtk2 should be placed under > GNOME->Games. I think GNOME->Games should be for games that are distributed > with GNOME much like KDE has their kde-games package. This may require > further > discussion on the fedora-games-list. Not a blocker. I took that GNOME entry in the .desktop over from the package on which I based mine, but I agree it isn't a gnome app, dropped. New version here: Spec URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/arrows.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/arrows-0.6-2.fc7.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 216130] Review Request: glest - 3D real time strategy 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: glest - 3D real time strategy game Alias: glest https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216130 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| Alias||glest -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214818] Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player similar to xmms
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player similar to xmms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214818 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 14:59 EST --- 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 216723] Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 14:23 EST --- Updated as requested in comment #2. Spec URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/libsieve.spec SRPM URL: http://www.symetrix.com/~bjohnson/projects/Fedora-Extras/libsieve-2.1.13-2.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 213798] Review Request: python-alsaaudio - Python Alsa Bindings
Please 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-alsaaudio - Python Alsa Bindings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213798 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 13:41 EST --- MUST items: * rpmlint output: W: python-alsaaudio invalid-license PSF - see LICENSE * package is named well * spec file name is good * package meets Packaging Guideline * package is licensed with a PSF open-source compatible license * License field in spec file matches actual license * license file is included in %doc * md5sums are matching (23163f572f8f3a0b295f48f90165e767) * package successfully compiles on x86_64 * BuildRequires listed well * no locales * no need to %post and %postun sections * not relocatable * no duplicates in %files * every %files section includes %defattr * proper %clean sectio * macros used well Nothings stands in the way to approve 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 216723] Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 13:31 EST --- > Is this your first package? Not able to see you in any existing package owner. > If you are first time submitter then i can not officially review this package. Yes, it's the first package I've submitted to FE. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214818] Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player similar to xmms
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player similar to xmms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214818 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216131] Review Request: glest-data - Data files for the game Glest
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: glest-data - Data files for the game Glest Alias: glest-data https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216131 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| Alias||glest-data -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216130] Review Request: glest - 3D real time strategy 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: glest - 3D real time strategy game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216130 Bug 216130 depends on bug 210553, which changed state. Bug 210553 Summary: Review Request: xerces-c - Validating XML Parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210553 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 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 13:03 EST --- Done. Successfully built in devel. Thanks 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 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] 2006-11-25 12:52 EST --- I checked md5 against Source URL you provided. I can approve this package if you are going to include new source url while importing this package or submit new one . Will check it and then actually approve 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 216723] Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 12:48 EST --- you need to correct SPEC. I got following rpmlint warnings on binary rpm W: libsieve incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.1.13-1.1.sc 2.1.13-1.1 The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. ==> Remove .sc from Chnagelog W: libsieve devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/libsieve.so A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a development package. ==> .so files are part of -devel packages. W: libsieve one-line-command-in-%post /sbin/ldconfig You should use %post -p instead of using: %post It will avoid the fork of a shell interpreter to execute your command as well as allows rpm to automatically mark the dependency on your command. ==>Use %post -p /sbin/ldconfig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 214818] Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player similar to xmms
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: audacious - A GTK2 based media player similar to xmms https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=214818 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 12:45 EST --- Ok here comes Final Review. Review: + package builds in mock (development i386) for FC6. + rpmlint is silent for RPM and SRPM. + source files match upstream. f718f66ec0cab46bf6210d2243d12be1 audacious-1.2.1.tgz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named and 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. + COPYING included in %doc. + 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 files present in -devel + -devel and -libs subpackage exists + no .la files. + translations are available. + update-desktop-database is used at postun and post + called /sbin/ldconfig on libs package. + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Desktop file installed successfully + Desktop file is handled correctly in SPEC file. + GUI application 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 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] 2006-11-25 12:44 EST --- Till you take time to update new SRPM here comes review 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. 77a64c944cf1516bcc514456de22a82b Gtk2-Notify-0.02.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 217239] Review Request: arrows - Neat little maze 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: arrows - Neat little maze game
Alias: arrows
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217239
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 12:41 EST ---
REVIEW CHECKLIST
- rpmlint output clean
- package named according to package naming guidelines
- spec filename matches %{name}
- package meets Packaging Guidelines
- package licensed with open source compatible license
- license matches actual license
- license file included in %doc
- spec written in American english
- spec is legible
- sources match upstream
d6cf52ff319c295b9fb6982c023ec7f0 arrows-0.6.tar.gz
- successfully compiles and builds on FC6 x86_64
- all build dependencies listed in BR
- no locales
- no shared libraries
- package is not relocatable
- package owns all directories it creates
X package uses a directory it doesnt create and I cannot determine if its pulled
in from Requires packages.
This package puts an icon in /usr/share/icons/hicolor/24x24/apps/
- no duplicates in %files
- file permissions set properly
- package contains proper %clean
- macro usage consistent
- contains code
- no large documentation
- %doc does not affect runtime
- no header files or static libraries
- no pkgconfig files
- no devel subpackage required
- no .la files
O desktop file installed properly
(although see my comment in SHOULD fix)
- package does not own files or directories owned by other packages
MUST FIX
- Shouldn't this require some package to get the icon dir? If not, please tell
me how I determine which Requires would pull this in. Perhaps Require:
gnome-icon-theme? Or hicolor-icon-theme if you decide to move this out of the
GNOME menu (see SHOULD FIX section).
SHOULD FIX
- I'm not sure I agree all games compiled with gtk2 should be placed under
GNOME->Games. I think GNOME->Games should be for games that are distributed
with GNOME much like KDE has their kde-games package. This may require further
discussion on the fedora-games-list. Not a blocker.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216723] Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216723 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 12:19 EST --- Is this your first package? Not able to see you in any existing package owner. If you are first time submitter then i can not officially review 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 215267] Review Request: Django - A high-level Python Web 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: Django - A high-level Python Web framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=215267 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 12:16 EST --- Built for Rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216517] Review Request: gnome-valgrind-session - Run an entire GNOME session under valgrind
Please 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-valgrind-session - Run an entire GNOME session under valgrind https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216517 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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] 2006-11-25 12:05 EST --- The perl line in %prep was supposed to fix this. Now I realize there is a typo in this line : there is a w at the end of the line which should be removed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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] 2006-11-25 11:58 EST --- Failed on x86_64, as already mentioned Ville Skyttä. http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/logs/fedora-development-extras/22298-xerces-c-2.7.0-5.fc7/x86_64/build.log + export DOCDIR + rm -rf /var/tmp/xerces-c-2.7.0-5.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/doc/xerces-c-doc-2.7.0 + /bin/mkdir -p /var/tmp/xerces-c-2.7.0-5.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/doc/xerces-c-doc-2.7.0 + cp -pr Readme.html LICENSE NOTICE STATUS credits.txt doc samples /var/tmp/xerces-c-2.7.0-5.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/share/doc/xerces-c-doc-2.7.0 + exit 0 Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 Processing files: xerces-c-debuginfo-2.7.0-5.fc7 Provides: libxerces-c.so.27.0.debug()(64bit) libxerces-depdom.so.27.0.debug()(64bit) Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 RPM build errors: File not found by glob: /var/tmp/xerces-c-2.7.0-5.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/libxerces*.so.* File not found by glob: /var/tmp/xerces-c-2.7.0-5.fc7-root-mockbuild/usr/lib64/libxerces*.so -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217239] Review Request: arrows - Neat little maze 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: arrows - Neat little maze game Alias: arrows https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217239 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| Alias||arrows -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217239] New: Review Request: arrows - Neat little maze game
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=217239 Summary: Review Request: arrows - Neat little maze game 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://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/arrows.spec SRPM URL: http://people.atrpms.net/~hdegoede/arrows-0.6-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: It's a maze game of sorts. Guide the spinning blue thing through the maze of arrows, creating and destroying arrows as necessary to collect the green things. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216517] Review Request: gnome-valgrind-session - Run an entire GNOME session under valgrind
Please 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-valgrind-session - Run an entire GNOME session under valgrind https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216517 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 10:34 EST --- Dave, I put the tarball you asked for at http://hp.cl.no/proj/gnome-valgrind-session/src/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217231] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217231 [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 216723] Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libsieve - A library for parsing, sorting and filtering your mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216723 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217180] Review Request: wbxml2 - WBXML parser and compiler 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: wbxml2 - WBXML parser and compiler library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217180 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 09:15 EST --- Review for release 5: * RPM name is OK * Source xerces-c-src_2_7_0.tar.gz is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock * rpmlints look OK * File lists look OK * Works fine 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 217229] Review Request: libmpd - Music Player Daemon 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: libmpd - Music Player Daemon library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217229 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 09:14 EST --- (sorry for the "INSERT RESULT OF RUN TEST", I did actually test 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 217232] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217232 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 09:12 EST --- *** Bug 217231 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 217231] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217231 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 09:12 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 217232 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217232] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217232 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 09:12 EST --- me also interested but i am not able to found Reporter in owners.list -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 212715] Review Request: openvrml - VRML/X3D runtime 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: openvrml - VRML/X3D runtime library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=212715 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 09:07 EST --- Confirming absence of OpenVRML plugin in 'about:plugins' and subsequent failure to handle .wrl files, as reported in comment #21. - firefox-1.5.0.8-1.fc6 - No improvement with new created profile - strace reveals openvrml.so being loaded when consulting "about:plugins" - ldd /usr/lib/mozilla/plugins/openvrml.so shows no obvious problems -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217231] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217231 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: keyTouch|Review Request: keyTouch CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 09:07 EST --- Is this your first 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 217229] Review Request: libmpd - Music Player Daemon 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: libmpd - Music Player Daemon library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217229 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 08:27 EST --- Review for release 2: * RPM name is OK * Source libmpd-0.12.0.tar.gz is the same as upstream * Builds fine in mock * rpmlint of libmpd looks OK * rpmlint of libmpd-devel looks OK * File list of libmpd looks OK * File list of libmpd-devel looks OK * INSERT RESULT OF RUN TEST Needs work: * As libmpd-devel ships a pkgconfig file (.pc), is should have "Requires: pkgconfig" Fix this and you're good to go -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217225] Review Request: perl-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection
Please 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-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217225 [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 217232] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217232 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 07:45 EST --- I'm interested in reviewing, too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217225] Review Request: perl-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection
Please 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-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217225 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 07:43 EST --- Ok, approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217232] Review Request: keyTouch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: keyTouch https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217232 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: keyTouch|Review Request: keyTouch --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 07:24 EST --- I was trying to find some time for packaging this, so I guess I could instead review yours. Where are the spec and 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 217232] New: Review Request: keyTouch
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=217232 Summary: Review Request: keyTouch 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 Description: KeyTouch is a program which allows you to easily configure the extra function keys of your keyboard. This means that you can define, for every individual function key, what to do if it is pressed. http://keytouch.sourceforge.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217231] New: Review Request: keyTouch
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=217231 Summary: Review Request: keyTouch 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 Description: KeyTouch is a program which allows you to easily configure the extra function keys of your keyboard. This means that you can define, for every individual function key, what to do if it is pressed. http://keytouch.sourceforge.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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] 2006-11-25 06:23 EST ---
(In reply to comment #15)
> (In reply to comment #14)
> > E: xerces-c-doc script-without-shebang
> > /usr/share/doc/xerces-c-doc-2.7.0/samples/configure.in
> > E: xerces-c-doc script-without-shebang
> > /usr/share/doc/xerces-c-doc-2.7.0/samples/config.h.in
>
> These should be trivially fixed with something like
> chmod -x samples/{config.h,configure}.in
> in %prep.
Done.
> > We can simply remove all these executable scripts from docs
>
> A dependency on /bin/sh is not really a problem here IMO.
OK.
http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SPECS/xerces-c.spec
http://lemenkov.newmail.ru/SRPMS/xerces-c-2.7.0-5.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217229] New: Review Request: libmpd - Music Player Daemon library
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=217229 Summary: Review Request: libmpd - Music Player Daemon library 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://lisas.de/~adrian/rpm/libmpd.spec SRPM URL: http://lisas.de/~adrian/rpm/libmpd-0.12.0-2.src.rpm Description: libmpd is an abstraction around libmpdclient. It provides an easy and reliable callback based interface to mpd. This library is needed to update gmpc to 0.13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217225] Review Request: perl-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection
Please 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-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217225 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 06:07 EST --- > How about a "Requires: mod_perl"? I'm not sure if this package would work at > all without it, but I suppose at least it's not that useful without it. It can be used in cgi mode, so without mod_perl (ok, not very usefull). Other perl-Apache extension didn't require it too. Spec URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/perl-Apache-DBI.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/perl-Apache-DBI-1.05-2.fc7.src.rpm Mock Log: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/perl-Apache-DBI-build.log Changes - no more perldoc - no more OPTIMIZE - traces.txt & eg/ add to %doc - Improved Summary -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217225] Review Request: perl-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection
Please 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-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database
connection
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=217225
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-11-25 05:19 EST ---
The perldoc generated license files are not needed, and should go. Instead, it
would be a good idea to ask upstream to include license files in the
distribution.
Improved Summary suggestion: Persistent database connections with
Apache/mod_perl
How about a "Requires: mod_perl"? I'm not sure if this package would work at
all without it, but I suppose at least it's not that useful without it.
OPTIMIZE="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" should go, this is a noarch package.
Include traces.txt and eg/ in docs? Remember to do something like this in
%prep:
%{__perl} -pi -e 's|/usr/local/bin/perl|%{__perl}|' eg/startup.pl
chmod 644 eg/startup.pl
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 217225] New: Review Request: perl-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection
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=217225 Summary: Review Request: perl-Apache-DBI - Initiate a persistent database connection 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://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/perl-Apache-DBI.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/perl-Apache-DBI-1.05-1.fc7.src.rpm Mock Log: http://remi.collet.free.fr/rpms/extras/perl-Apache-DBI-build.log Description: This is version 1.05 of Apache::AuthDBI and Apache::DBI. These modules are supposed to be used with the Apache server together with an embedded perl interpreter like mod_perl. They provide support for basic authentication and authorization as well as support for persistent database connections via Perl's Database Independent Interface (DBI). o DBI.pm provides persistent database connections: - connections can be established during server-startup - configurable rollback to ensure data integrity - configurable verification of the connections to avoid time-outs. o AuthDBI.pm provides authentication and authorization: - optional shared cache for passwords to minimize database load - configurable cleanup-handler deletes outdated entries from the cache Apache::DBI has been in widespread deployment on many platforms for years. Apache::DBI is one of the most widely used mod_perl related modules. It can be considered stable. --- I'm not used to package PERL extension, but this one is needed by a project i work on (ocsinventory). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216535] Review Request: mp3gain - Lossless MP3 volume adjustment tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mp3gain - Lossless MP3 volume adjustment tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216535 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 | nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
