[Bug 219653] Review Request: solfege - music education software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: solfege - music education software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219653 [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 220736] Review Request: doclifter - lifts man pages and other troff-based markups to XML-DocBook
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: doclifter - lifts man pages and other troff-based
markups to XML-DocBook
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220736
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 04:08 EST ---
$ manlifter
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /usr/bin/manlifter, line 599, in ?
exec 'import doclifter_test%s' % os.getpid()
File string, line 1, in ?
ImportError: No module named doclifter_test2931
Current directory, where you create the temporary copy of doclifter,
is not in standard module search path list by default. This is
because manlifter lives in /usr/bin, and hence /usr/bin is in
sys.path, but os.getcwd() is not. You could append it as
work-around, however.
[...]
$ man doclifter
looks very damaged at the end in section Troff Translation on FC6.
[...]
Packaging hints:
Requires: python2
Instead you want Requires: python (which is v2 since a long time),
because your scripts depend on just /usr/bin/python (and /usr/bin/env
python) and not /usr/bin/python2.
%install
[ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -a $RPM_BUILD_ROOT != / ] rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
%clean
[ $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -a $RPM_BUILD_ROOT != / ] rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
This is just added obscurity. Useless for many years. In particular,
since you do define a custom BuildRoot in your spec file already.
rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}
is sufficient and nice to the eyes. Btw, it is a myth that the extra
check has ever been useful. Unless you've been burnt yourself you will
have a hard time finding anybody who has ever set --buildroot=/ while it
that was possible.
Nowadays, BuildRoot cannot be /.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220766] Review Request: ScientificPython - a collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ScientificPython - a collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220766 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 04:23 EST --- Updated srpm and spec: http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/ScientificPython/ScientificPython-2.6-3.src.rpm http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/ScientificPython/ScientificPython.spec Changelog * Mon Dec 25 2006 Jef Spaleta [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.6-3 - Add tk and qt subpackages - Add bsp and mpi subpackages - Requires clean-ups for all subpackages - Patch to correctly locate netcdf.a and netcdf.h * Mon Dec 25 2006 Jef Spaleta [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.6-2 - Add docs subpackage * Sun Dec 24 2006 Jef Spaleta [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.6-1 - Initial ScientificPython 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 192876] Review Request: V2Strip ID3v2(Mp3 Files) tags remover
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: V2Strip ID3v2(Mp3 Files) tags remover https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192876 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |NOTABUG BugsThisDependsOn||201449 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 192876] Review Request: V2Strip ID3v2(Mp3 Files) tags remover
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: V2Strip ID3v2(Mp3 Files) tags remover https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192876 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|201449 | OtherBugsDependingO||201449 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 220743] Review Request: postgis - Geographic Information Systems Extensions to PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: postgis - Geographic Information Systems Extensions to
PostgreSQL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220743
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:36 EST ---
Review for release 1:
* RPM name is OK
* Source postgis-1.2.0.tar.gz is the same as upstream
* This is the latest version
* Builds fine in mock
* rpmlint of postgis-utils looks OK
* rpmlint of postgis-jdbc looks OK
* rpmlint of postgis looks OK
* File list of postgis-utils looks OK
* File list of postgis-jdbc looks OK
* File list of postgis looks OK
Needs work:
* BuildRoot should be
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
(wiki: PackagingGuidelines#BuildRoot)
* Spec file: some paths are not replaced with RPM macros
(wiki: QAChecklist item 7)
Minor:
* Duplicate BuildRequires: jpackage-utils (by ant), ant (by ant-junit), junit
(by ant-junit)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216105] Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216105 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:40 EST --- Paul, Kevin, pulled in Jef's updated spec as is. Any further comments, or can this be 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 220743] Review Request: postgis - Geographic Information Systems Extensions to PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: postgis - Geographic Information Systems Extensions to
PostgreSQL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220743
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 07:49 EST ---
Hi,
(In reply to comment #1)
Review for release 1:
snip
Needs work:
* BuildRoot should be
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
(wiki: PackagingGuidelines#BuildRoot)
Ok, fixed.
* Spec file: some paths are not replaced with RPM macros
(wiki: QAChecklist item 7)
Oops, fixed. Please let me know if I'm still missing one.
Minor:
* Duplicate BuildRequires: jpackage-utils (by ant), ant (by ant-junit), junit
(by ant-junit)
Very good catch. This is fixed, too.
Spec URL:
http://developer.postgresql.org/~devrim/rpms/other/postgis/postgis.spec
SRPM URL:
http://developer.postgresql.org/~devrim/rpms/other/postgis/postgis-1.2.0-2.src.rpm
Thanks for the review.
Regards, Devrim
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216105] Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216105 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 08:26 EST --- Has anybody else seen the problem with the dropin cache at package removal time that I mentioned in Comment #1? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220210] Review Request: krename - Powerful batch file renamer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: krename - Powerful batch file renamer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220210 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 09:19 EST --- Please rebuild 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 216102] Review Request: python-twisted-conch - Twisted SSHv2 implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-conch - Twisted SSHv2 implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216102 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 09:40 EST --- http://thomas.apestaart.org/download/pkg/fedora-6-i386-extras/python-twisted-conch-0.7.0-4.fc6/ incorporated changes suggested -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219036] Review Request: perl-Roman - Roman module from CPAN
Please 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-Roman - Roman module from CPAN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219036 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 09:49 EST --- Sam, (In reply to comment #6) Was this ping directed at me? Yes. Is there something else that I need to do? Please read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors and, if this is your first package, see also http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/HowToGetSponsored and add FE-NEEDSPONSOR to the blocking list (see step 7 of the first link). Regards, jpo -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216105] Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216105 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 10:12 EST --- I removed all my packages (including the divmod ones) and now I am able to reproduce it. Before I had it spuriously and couldn't figure out a way to debug it. I dug a little deeper now and it seems that the Twisted code logs an exception using its own log handler when it finds a plugin in the cache that is no longer on disk. Since this is the point of updating the cache - removing plugins that no longer exist - I changed twisted-dropin-cache to not log on that particular error. I pushed a new python-twisted-core package to extras that should fix 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 220775] New: Review Request: Exaile! - A music player
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=220775 Summary: Review Request: Exaile! - A music player 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: ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/exaile/exaile.spec SRPM URL: ftp://czar.eas.yorku.ca/pub/exaile/exaile-0.2.6-1.src.rpm Description: Exaile is a media player aiming to be similar to KDE's AmaroK, but for GTK+. It incorporates many of the cool things from AmaroK (and other media players) like automatic fetching of album art, handling of large libraries, lyrics fetching, artist/album information via the wikipedia, last.fm support, optional iPod support (assuming you have python-gpod installed). In addition, Exaile also includes a built in shoutcast directory browser, tabbed playlists (so you can have more than one playlist open at a time), blacklisting of tracks (so they don't get scanned into your library), downloading of guitar tablature from fretplay.com, and submitting played tracks on your iPod to last.fm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220730] Review Request:gpodder - Podcast receiver/catcher written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request:gpodder - Podcast receiver/catcher written in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220730 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 11:37 EST --- Jef, I'll get you a review for this later today. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219071] Review Request: pyfribidi - A Python binding for GNU FriBidi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: pyfribidi - A Python binding for GNU FriBidi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219071 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 12:26 EST --- Well, * Please consider to include ChangeLog file. Other things are okay. - This package (pyfribidi) is APPROVED by me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220775] Review Request: Exaile! - A music player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Exaile! - A music player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220775 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Component|915resolution |Package 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 219872] Review Request: curlftpfs - user-space FTP filesystem using libcurl and FUSE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: curlftpfs - user-space FTP filesystem using libcurl and FUSE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219872 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 13:59 EST --- Okay. * Please consider to include ChangeLog file. Other things are okay. Then: -- NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few (or no) work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to formally review other submitters' review request and approve the packages. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines. Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a pre-review (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) of other person's review request. When you submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora Extras package review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/showdependencytree.cgi?id=FE-NEWhide_resolved=1 Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets And Please check the details on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/HowToGetSponsored -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216105] Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-web - Twisted web server, programmable in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216105 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 15:28 EST --- I don't see any more blockers here... using the new python-twisted-core from the buildsys (it's not been pushed yet) I don't see any dropin cache issues. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 216102] Review Request: python-twisted-conch - Twisted SSHv2 implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: python-twisted-conch - Twisted SSHv2 implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216102 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 15:31 EST --- All those changes look good... 1 isn't really a blocker. 2 and 3 are fixed. 4 isn't a issue. I don't see any blockers, this package is APPROVED. Don't forget to close this review request with NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219973] Review Request: powerdns - A modern, advanced and high performance authoritative-only nameserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: powerdns - A modern, advanced and high performance
authoritative-only nameserver
Alias: powerdns
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219973
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 15:58 EST ---
I would be happy to review this package...
See below - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License (GPL)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
33b20ef1b767f93297101f2aa09e99ed pdns-2.9.20.tar.gz
33b20ef1b767f93297101f2aa09e99ed pdns-2.9.20.tar.gz.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK/See below - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane:
SHOULD Items:
See below - Should build in mock.
See below - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have sane scriptlets.
See below - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned
depend.
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
Issues:
1. The upstream tar is 'pdns' and their shipped spec file makes a 'pdns-static'
package. Should this package be called 'pdns' instead of 'powerdns' ?
2. Doesn't build on x86_64 under mock. Looks like they have a hard coded
check for mysql libs using /usr/lib:
checking for MySQL library directory... configure: error: Didn't find the mysql
library dir in '/usr/local/mysql/lib/mysql /usr/local/lib/mysql
/opt/mysql/lib/mysql /usr/lib/mysql /usr/local/mysql/lib /usr/local/lib
/opt/mysql/lib /usr/lib'
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.75004 (%build)
I would be happy to provide access to a x86_64 box for testing if you
need one.
3. You should probably have your Requires for the subpackages
also require the release, ie:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
4. Why the ldconfig calls in post/postun? The main package has no library files
at all, and the subpackages just have .so's in %{_libdir}/%{name}/ directory
that I assume are dlopened by the package when configured to do so. There should
be no need for any ldconfig that I can see here, unless I am missing
something...
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220210] Review Request: krename - Powerful batch file renamer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: krename - Powerful batch file renamer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220210 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 16:24 EST --- I would really like to, but currently I'm encountering problems with my internet connection, so I'm simply unable to upload it. I hope I'll be within a week. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220730] Review Request:gpodder - Podcast receiver/catcher written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request:gpodder - Podcast receiver/catcher written in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220730 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 17:11 EST --- MD5Sum: 8c58c613d049bd2387e09876c574ebf9 gpodder-0.8.0.tar.gz Good: * Source URL is canonical * Upstream source tarball verified * Package name conforms to the Fedora Naming Guidelines * Group Tag is from the official list * Buildroot has all required elements * All paths begin with macros * All necessary BuildRequires listed. * Files have appropriate permissions and owners * Rpmlint produces no warnings or errors. * Package builds in Mock fine. * Package installs and uninstalls cleanly on FC6 * Package seems to work fine, based on a quick test. Minor Items that should be fixed before building in FE: * Drop the 'X-Fedora-Extras' category from the desktop file. It was recently decided to drop the 'X-Fedora' 'X-Fedora-Extras' categories. Refer to the example at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#head-254ddf07aae20a23ced8cecc219d8f73926e9755 * Drop the Requires on Python, since it is redundant. The BR on python-devel will provide python(abi) = 2.4 automatically. Refer to your build logs for verification. Minor: * Close button on about window does not work. This isn't a blocker, but probably at a minimum should be reported upstream. +1 APPROVE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 218678] Review Request: pybluez - python API for the bluez bluetooth stack
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: pybluez - python API for the bluez bluetooth stack
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=218678
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778
nThis||
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 18:32 EST ---
Hey Will.
I would be happy to move this review forward and look at sponsoring you.
Do you have any other packages ready to review right now? It helps to see a few
packages to know when someone knows the ropes and is ready to be sponsored.
Anyhow, here is a review of this package:
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
OK - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK - License (GPL)
OK - License field in spec matches
OK - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
3e7e951ea4e8433f3b80ef8c14d99c28 pybluez-src-0.9.1.tar.gz
3e7e951ea4e8433f3b80ef8c14d99c28 pybluez-src-0.9.1.tar.gz.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
See below - No rpmlint output.
See below - final provides and requires are sane:
SHOULD Items:
OK - Should build in mock.
i386/x86_64 - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version
Issues:
1. Why the:
BuildArch: i386 x86_64 ppc
line? Does it not work on other arches?
2. In build you have:
# Remove CFLAGS=... for noarch packages (unneeded)
CFLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS %{__python} setup.py build
why are you passing them in if you don't need them?
Perhaps that line should be:
%{__python} setup.py build
3. rpmlint says:
W: pybluez incoherent-version-in-changelog -0.9.1-2 0.9.1-2.fc7
There is a - in there that shouldn't be.
Also, you don't need to add dist tags normally to changelog versions.
W: pybluez doc-file-dependency
/usr/share/doc/pybluez-0.9.1/examples/bluezchat/bluezchat.py /usr/bin/python
The bluezchat.py example should be made mode 644 like all the other examples.
4. The package provides:
_bluetooth.so
Which is kinda ugly, but not a blocker I guess.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177747] Review Request: glade3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: glade3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177747 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 18:48 EST --- Hmm, I can't see the logic (to be honest) of splitting the package in the way you have. To me, it makes far more sense to have glade3 with the binary and any shared libs (will the glade3 binary run without the libs?) and having a devel file with the .so files. Also, why have you moved from the standard version-release system to version-release.number? Please re-instate any changes that you made to the spec file prior to the version you want reviewing in the changelog - it helps people learn. 3.0.2 is quite an old version now - any chance of moving it to 3.1.4? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220789] New: Review Request: fail2ban - Ban IPs that make too many password failures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220789 Summary: Review Request: fail2ban - Ban IPs that make too many password failures 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://dl.atrpms.net/all/fail2ban.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.atrpms.net/all/fail2ban-0.6.2-1.at.src.rpm Description: Fail2ban scans log files like /var/log/pwdfail or /var/log/apache/error_log and bans IP that makes too many password failures. It updates firewall rules to reject the IP address. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210424] Review Request: fail2ban - scan log files and ban IPs with too many password failures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fail2ban - scan log files and ban IPs with too many password failures https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210424 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 19:06 EST --- Thanks Mamoru, the new package is under bug #220789 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210424] Review Request: fail2ban - scan log files and ban IPs with too many password failures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fail2ban - scan log files and ban IPs with too many password failures https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210424 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 19:24 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 220789 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219036] Review Request: perl-Roman - Roman module from CPAN
Please 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-Roman - Roman module from CPAN https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219036 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219978] Review Request: thunar-media-tags-plugin - Media Tags plugin for the Thunar file manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: thunar-media-tags-plugin - Media Tags plugin for the Thunar file manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219978 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 21:13 EST --- See below - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License(GPL) OK - License field in spec matches OK - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 1535da390f7e26350e9bff1a5bc3cdae thunar-media-tags-plugin-0.1.1.tar.bz2 1535da390f7e26350e9bff1a5bc3cdae thunar-media-tags-plugin-0.1.1.tar.bz2.1 OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Spec handles locales/find_lang OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. i386/x86_64 - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should function as described. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version Issues: 1. Should the name of this package have a capital T ? ie, thunar-media-tags-plugin should be Thunar-media-tags-plugin Since the Thunar package uses a uppercase T? Otherwise I see no blockers or issues, so this package is APPROVED. If you do decide to change it to use a uppercase T, also do change the summary of this bug so the package is tracked properly. Don't forget to close this package review NEXTRELEASE once it's been imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 210423] Review Request: snitch - a powerful packet-shaping utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: snitch - a powerful packet-shaping utility Alias: volp https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=210423 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 21:29 EST --- Changing the status to NEEDINFO from reporter. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are 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] 2006-12-26 21:33 EST --- One month passed since my comment #5. I will close this bug as NOTABUG if no response from Denis is received on this bug within another one week. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 209214] Review Request: libprelude - Prelude library collection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libprelude - Prelude library collection https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209214 [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 220796] New: Review Request: turba - horde contact manager
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=220796 Summary: Review Request: turba - horde contact manager 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://theholbrooks.org/RPMS/turba.spec SRPM URL: http://theholbrooks.org/RPMS/turba-2.1.3-1.src.rpm Description: Turba is the Horde contact management application, which allows access to and storage of personal contacts (including name, email address, phone number, and other easily customizable fields). Turba integrates with IMP (Horde's webmail application) as its address book. The Horde Project writes web applications in PHP and releases them under Open Source licenses. For more information (including help with Turba) please visit http://www.horde.org/. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 220796] Review Request: turba - horde contact manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: turba - horde contact manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220796 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||189195 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 189195] Review Request: horde - php application 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: horde - php application framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=189195 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||220796 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 220775] Review Request: Exaile! - A music player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Exaile! - A music player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220775 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|163776 |163778 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 23:24 EST --- pacakaging looks nice. as its pygtk application no need for -devel for included .so file. desktop file even worked well. But mock build failed with In file included from mmkeys.override:6: /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:20: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'PyObject' /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:27: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'PyObject_HEAD' /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:38: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'PyObject_HEAD' /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:48: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'PyObject_HEAD' /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:60: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before 'PyObject_HEAD' /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:67: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before 'PyTypeObject' /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:68: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before '*' token /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:76: error: expected ')' before '*' token /usr/include/pygtk-2.0/pygobject.h:78: error: expected ';' before 'void' mmkeys.c:16: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before '*' token mmkeys.c:21: warning: data definition has no type or storage class mmkeys.c:21: error: expected ',' or ';' before 'PyMmKeys_Type' mmkeys.c:30: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before 'PyObject' mmkeys.c:30: error: expected declaration specifiers or '...' before 'PyObject' mmkeys.c: In function '_wrap_mmkeys_new': mmkeys.c:34: error: 'args' undeclared (first use in this function) mmkeys.c:34: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once mmkeys.c:34: error: for each function it appears in.) mmkeys.c:34: error: 'kwargs' undeclared (first use in this function) mmkeys.c:39: error: 'struct _PyGObject_Functions' has no member named 'pygobject_constructv' mmkeys.c:40: error: 'PyGObject' has no member named 'obj' mmkeys.c:42: error: 'PyExc_RuntimeError' undeclared (first use in this function) mmkeys.c: At top level: mmkeys.c:49: warning: data definition has no type or storage class mmkeys.c:49: error: expected ',' or ';' before 'PyMmKeys_Type' mmkeys.c:98: error: expected '=', ',', ';', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before 'mmkeys_functions' mmkeys.c:104: error: expected ')' before '*' token make[1]: *** [mmkeyspy.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/exaile_0.2.6/mmkeys' make: *** [mmkeys.so] Error 2 error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.14826 (%install) Maybe you need to add python-devel as BR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219962] Review Request: crystal-clear - Crystal Clear KDE Icon set
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: crystal-clear - Crystal Clear KDE Icon set https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219962 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|163778 |163779 nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-26 23:59 EST --- Review: + package builds in mock (development i386). + rpmlint is silent for SRPM - rpmlint is NOT for RPMS but I found them harmless. + source files match upstream. adb7962b585c8ad12adc3b82246edb35 CrystalClear.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. - But License text is NOT included in package. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .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. + icon set installed successfully. 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 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 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-27 00:03 EST --- Better to discuss this then on Fedora-extras mailing 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 219114] Review Request: flac123 - Command-line program for playing FLAC audio files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: flac123 - Command-line program for playing FLAC audio files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=219114 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-27 00:04 EST --- Don't forget to CLOSE this review after you finished building package in CVS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 177747] Review Request: glade3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: glade3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=177747 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2006-12-27 01:13 EST --- libgladeui belongs in its own package because it is useful on its own (i.e., without the glade3 binary). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
