[Bug 238562] Review Request: machineball - A futuristic ball game with simple rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: machineball - A futuristic ball game with simple rules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238562 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 02:23 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) Doesn't build in mock: BuildRequires: mesa-libGLU-devel fixes this issue. Package seems quite interesting so I'm probably going to review it. However, feel free to take it as long as it's not assigned to me. Thanks, I'll at that BR together with any other necessary changes once a full review is done, if you want a new version with the BR added before starting the review let me know. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225765] Merge Review: fonts-japanese
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: fonts-japanese https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225765 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Fixed In Version||fonts-japanese-0.20061016- ||6.fc7 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 02:24 EST --- CLOSING this bug for now as reviewed version fonts-japanese-0.20061016-6.fc7 of this package is already in 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 225892] Merge Review: hwbrowser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: hwbrowser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225892 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Fixed In Version||hwbrowser-0.32-1.fc7 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 02:26 EST --- CLOSING this bug for now as reviewed version hwbrowser-0.32-1.fc7 of this package is already in 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 238373] Review Request: libopenraw - decode camera RAW 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: libopenraw - decode camera RAW files. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238373 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 02:35 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) [...] === Issues === 1. Package is LGPL licensed, not GPL FIXED. 2. Please use wget -N or similar to download the source tarball so that the source timestamp is preserved. FIXED. New source tarball downloaded. 3. /usr/include/libopenraw-1.0 is unowned an should be owned by libopenraw-devel (you can use %dir to do this) FIXED. 4. Shouldn't package libopenraw-gnome-devel also require libopenraw-devel? FIXED. It should, so I have added it to the list of requirements. New versions are available at: http://libopenraw.freedesktop.org/download/libopenraw-0.0.2.tar.gz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 231859] Review Request: scratchpad - Spatial text editor for the GNOME desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scratchpad - Spatial text editor for the GNOME desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231859 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 02:57 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) Not providing a .desktop entry for a gui app would break the packaging standards as it's required. However, we could argue to the packaging committe that it should be packaged as a shell extension (is that what's it's called in gnome?) only, but it seems dependent on the .desktop entry for that to work. Remove the .desktop entry and it no longer works by right-click on a file. But adding Hidden=true in the .desktop file will cause the mimetypes and such to be available but not allow it to be displayed in the menus, or to be enabled by the menu editors. That way, you'd either have to start it with scratchpad file or right click from a file menu and open with scratchpad. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238373] Review Request: libopenraw - decode camera RAW 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: libopenraw - decode camera RAW files. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238373 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 03:08 EST --- [x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. License type: GPL in package spec, but LGPL in package [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. MD5SUM this package: eae40ecaa92f69d99b27ae3bad8aa8ae MD5SUM upstream package: eae40ecaa92f69d99b27ae3bad8aa8ae [x] Package must own all directories that it creates. *** 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 238824] New: Review Request: schismtracker - sound module composer/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=238824 Summary: Review Request: schismtracker - sound module composer/player Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/files/schismtracker.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/jnovy/files/schismtracker-0.5-0.1rc1.fc7.src.rpm Description: Schismtracker is a module tracker for the X Window System similar to the DOS program `Impulse Tracker'. Schismtracker can play/modify various sound formats such as MOD, S3M, XM, IT, 669 and others. The user interface is mostly text-based using SDL for graphical output. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238373] Review Request: libopenraw - decode camera RAW 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: libopenraw - decode camera RAW files. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238373 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 03:22 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: libopenraw Short Description: decode camera RAW files Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235191] Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235191 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 03:26 EST --- Following the spec directions for the bzr pull I get a mismatch in md5sums for the postr-icons.tar.gz: from bzr pull: 55230b0ae446905a554233b3e2411872 postr-icons.tar.gz from included tarball in postr-0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm 6dc9ac66f7f2a120e04e44938f384045 ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/postr-icons.tar.gz Can you double-check and see if you get the same result The md5sum for SOURCE0 looks good now a66f58dbdc5c1a1befd3fa9cee629b52 ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/postr-0.5.tar.gz -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238499] Review Request: kio_p7zip - Kio-slave for viewing 7zip files using p7zip
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kio_p7zip - Kio-slave for viewing 7zip files using p7zip https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238499 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 235191] Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235191 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 03:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) Following the spec directions for the bzr pull I get a mismatch in md5sums for the postr-icons.tar.gz: from bzr pull: 55230b0ae446905a554233b3e2411872 postr-icons.tar.gz from included tarball in postr-0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm 6dc9ac66f7f2a120e04e44938f384045 ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/postr-icons.tar.gz Can you double-check and see if you get the same result The md5sum for SOURCE0 looks good now a66f58dbdc5c1a1befd3fa9cee629b52 ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/postr-0.5.tar.gz -jef Now this is strange, there must be some tar-magic behind the scene that I do not understand: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ bzr branch -r 126 http://burtonini.com/bzr/postr/postr.dev/ Branched 126 revision(s). [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ cd postr.dev/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] postr.dev]$ tar czf postr-icons.tar.gz data setup.py [EMAIL PROTECTED] postr.dev]$ md5sum postr-icons.tar.gz 48d0e5d3d231690ff51586ff5a0a172d postr-icons.tar.gz [EMAIL PROTECTED] postr.dev]$ rm postr-icons.tar.gz [EMAIL PROTECTED] postr.dev]$ tar czf postr-icons.tar.gz data setup.py [EMAIL PROTECTED] postr.dev]$ md5sum postr-icons.tar.gz f3c4cb76eb6e157612a2f7104cecb0ea postr-icons.tar.gz I just don't get it; I get a different MD5SUM every time...?! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 237330] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for AES support -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Crypt-OpenSSL-AES -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for AES support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237330 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237331] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Random -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for Random Number support -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Crypt-OpenSSL-Random -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for Random Number support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237331 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237332] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for big numbers support -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Crypt-OpenSSL-Bignum -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for big numbers support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237332 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237333] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-DSA -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for DSA support -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Crypt-OpenSSL-DSA -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for DSA support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237333 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237334] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-RSA -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for RSA support -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Crypt-OpenSSL-RSA -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for RSA support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237334 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237335] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for PKCS10 support -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Crypt-OpenSSL-PKCS10 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for PKCS10 support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237335 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237336] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for X509 support -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for X509 support -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237336 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237337] perl-Digest-SHA -- Perl support for SHA digests -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: perl-Digest-SHA -- Perl support for SHA digests -- SPONSOR NEEDED https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237337 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 237338] Review Request: perl-Net-DNS-SEC -- Perl support for DNSSEC -- SPONSOR NEEDED
Please 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-Net-DNS-SEC -- Perl support for DNSSEC -- SPONSOR NEEDED Alias: perl-Net-DNS-SEC https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237338 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|177841 | 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 235636] Review Request: pipepanic - A pipe connecting 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: pipepanic - A pipe connecting game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235636 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 03:47 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: pipepanic Short Description: A pipe connecting game Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-5 FC-6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 236539] Review Request: perl-Math-Vec - Perl Math::Vec 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-Math-Vec - Perl Math::Vec module Alias: perl-Math-Vec https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=236539 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 04:11 EST --- Maybe change the description to: Object-Oriented Vector Math Methods in Perl which is a little more descriptive (from the website) BuildRequires: perl is superflous because perl(Module::Build) will automatically pull it in If you want to enable the pod tests, you might want to: export TEST_POD_COVERAGE=1 export TEST_POD=1 ./Build test I believe the preferred license string is GPL or Artistic for dual GPL/Artistic packages. I will follow up with a review soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235191] Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235191 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 04:17 EST --- The GOOD + naming is good + specfile name matches base package name + Licensed as GPL and includes COPYING file accordingly + specfile written in english-ese and is legible + included source md5sum checks with upstream source as listed in SOURCE0 url a66f58dbdc5c1a1befd3fa9cee629b52 postr-0.5.tar.gz + builds on x86 fedora-development in mock + no locales + not relocatable + permissions seem to be okay + clean section is okay + consistent use of macros + permissible code and content + items in doc are not runtime necessary + gui, desktop file installation looks good + does not obviously own files from another package + install section looks good + No .la files + No devel subpackage + Need need to for shared libraries sciptlets + icon cache scriplet lets look good. rpmlint binary clean: postr-0.5-2.fc7.noarch.rpm E: postr only-non-binary-in-usr-lib this is bogus, an typical of python files due to module tree location. rpmlint srpm only minor warning: postr-0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm W: postr mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 46) Nuke the tabs in the whitespace of the desktop file install command and this goes away. Application appears to function for me as anticipated. Photos were uploaded, there was much rejoicing. The BAD - SOURCE1 instructions do not produce tarball with matching md5sum. Not sure what's going on here. I can confirm that repeated tar czf gives different md5sums. But tar cf gives me something reproducible. So if i decompress the included tarball I still get a md5sum on postr-icons.tar compared to the one i create with bzr and tar cf data setup.py. Double check to see if you can get consistent comparisons against the tar file instead of the tar.gz. - base package must own all directories it creates and directory ownership of parent directories is accounted for in package deps Problem: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*/apps/ not owned by a required dep. Solution: adds Requires: hicolor-icon-theme Problem: /usr/lib/nautilus/extensions-1.0/python is not owned by any package. Suggested Solution: make the nautilus-python package create and own this directory. Fix is outside the scope of this review. But if you can commit a fix to the python-nautilus package with this fix , it will clear up the issue here. -Requires Do you really want to pull in python-twisted or do you want to pull in only a subset of the twisted packages? Looking over the python code in postr it looks like you technically only need to require python-twisted-core and python-twisted-web, instead of the metapackage python-twisted. So overall, pretty close to being approvable... that gzip behavior seems odd to me. -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238691] Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238691 [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 235191] Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: postr - Flickr uploader https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235191 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 05:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) rpmlint srpm only minor warning: postr-0.5-2.fc7.src.rpm W: postr mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 3, tab: line 46) Nuke the tabs in the whitespace of the desktop file install command and this goes away. FIXED. Application appears to function for me as anticipated. Photos were uploaded, there was much rejoicing. The BAD - SOURCE1 instructions do not produce tarball with matching md5sum. Not sure what's going on here. I can confirm that repeated tar czf gives different md5sums. But tar cf gives me something reproducible. So if i decompress the included tarball I still get a md5sum on postr-icons.tar compared to the one i create with bzr and tar cf data setup.py. Double check to see if you can get consistent comparisons against the tar file instead of the tar.gz. tar cf [...] produces consistent results, so this should be FIXED now. - base package must own all directories it creates and directory ownership of parent directories is accounted for in package deps Problem: /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*/apps/ not owned by a required dep. Solution: adds Requires: hicolor-icon-theme FIXED. Problem: /usr/lib/nautilus/extensions-1.0/python is not owned by any package. Suggested Solution: make the nautilus-python package create and own this directory. Fix is outside the scope of this review. But if you can commit a fix to the python-nautilus package with this fix , it will clear up the issue here. This has already been reported to bz and fixed :). See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238591 -Requires Do you really want to pull in python-twisted or do you want to pull in only a subset of the twisted packages? Looking over the python code in postr it looks like you technically only need to require python-twisted-core and python-twisted-web, instead of the metapackage python-twisted. I changed the requirements, and it works just fine. FIXED. So overall, pretty close to being approvable... that gzip behavior seems odd to me. Strange, but the uncompressed tar works... New versions at the same location as the previous ones. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238705] Review Request: avr-gcc - Cross Compiling GNU GCC targeted at avr
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: avr-gcc - Cross Compiling GNU GCC targeted at avr https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238705 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 05:07 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) (In reply to comment #7) I tend to agree with you, but the avr-gcc developers have actually made it possible to write c++ code (with exceptions) Well, I would have to investigate in depth, but I am having really strong doubts on this - For avr-rtems, we disable c++. /usr/bin/strip: Unable to recognise the format of the input file ... To work around this issue I am rewriting %__os_install_post. (Details to be found in my rtems*gcc*specs.). This is the same as done in the sdcc spec, right? Yep, the variant in sdcc is a stripped down version of what I use for rtems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235805] Review Request: camlimages - OCaml image processing 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: camlimages - OCaml image processing library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235805 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 05:30 EST --- Hi Hans, as promised on the Freetennis bug, an update! Spec URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/camlimages.spec SRPM URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/camlimages-2.2.0-5.src.rpm (They are uploading now) Changelog: * Thu May 03 2007 Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.2.0-5 - Revert -4 changes - Remove excludedirs patch, replace with a sed - Provide html documentation generated from running ocaml-ocamldoc * Thu Apr 26 2007 Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.2.0-4 - Add Provides: camlimages-static, and LICENSE to -devel docs * Thu Apr 12 2007 Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.2.0-3 - Remove .a .o files Some rationale: - Users don't care about the library references unless they are a developer, so I've placed them in -devel - I don't think it's worth adding a seperate -doc package (it's only 90KB) - rpmlint ocaml-naming-policy-not-applied should be ignored (it's actually ignored on F7, but showing on FC6 - The excludelibs patch was a waste of time, the sed is much better -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226363] Merge Review: redhat-lsb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: redhat-lsb https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226363 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 05:45 EST --- Thanks I will have a look and build into the new system. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235805] Review Request: camlimages - OCaml image processing 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: camlimages - OCaml image processing library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235805 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 05:48 EST --- Spec URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/camlimages.spec SRPM URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/camlimages-2.2.0-6.src.rpm Just including *.*a instead of deleting, per Debian's suggestion, uploading as I type. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235804] Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235804 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: ocamlSDL - |Review Request: ocaml-SDL - |OCaml bindings for SDL |OCaml bindings for SDL --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 06:06 EST --- Spec URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/ocaml-SDL.spec SRPM URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/ocaml-SDL-0.7.2-4.src.rpm rpmlint clean! * Thu May 03 2007 Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.7.2-4 - Rename per policy - Revert -3 changes - Add htmlref Same rationale for htmlref as in camlimages, except this time only 46K -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235815] Review Request: freetennis - Tennis simulation 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: freetennis - Tennis simulation game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235815 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 06:43 EST --- Spec URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/freetennis.spec SRPM URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/freetennis-0.4.8-2.src.rpm (Uploading now) Still rpmlint clean, changelog: * Thu May 03 2007 Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.4.8-2 - Add freetennis.png and alter freetennis.desktop to show icon - Change builddep to ocaml-SDL-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235804] Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235804
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 08:30 EST ---
MUST:
=
* rpmlint output is clean
* Package and spec file named appropriately
* Packaged according to packaging guidelines
* License ok
* spec file is legible and in Am. English.
* Source matches upstream
* Compiles and builds on devel i386
* BR: ok
* No locales
0 No shared libraries, ldconfig not needed
* Not relocatable
* Package owns / or requires all dirs
* No duplicate files Permissions ok
* %clean macro usage OK
* Contains code only
* %doc does not affect runtime, and isn't large enough to warrent a sub package
* -devel package as needed
* no .desktop file needed
MUST FIX
* Change Source0 from:
http://optusnet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/ocamlsdl/ocamlsdl-0.7.2.tar.gz
to the generic sf download url, and use %{version}:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/ocamlsdl/ocamlsdl-%{version}.tar.gz
* main package must require ocaml for /usr/lib/ocaml/stublibs dir ownership
* remove the unnecessary ldconfig %post(un) scripts, this are not normally
libs and since they are not installed in a path searched by ldconfig, calling
ldconfig is useless.
Should Fix
==
* Stop the obfuscated double %setup usage, instead of the 2 lines you can just
write: %setup -q -n ocamlsdl-%{version} -a 1
* No need to write:
%dir %{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl/*.*a
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl/*.cmi
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl/*.cmx
Instead you can just write:
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl
If there were files there which you wouldn't include with the wildcards,
then rpmbuild would refuse to build the rpm as there would be files in
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT, which aren't listed under any %files.
* also please always make all your %files entries like this:
%files
%defattr()
%doc ...
other files and dirs
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235805] Review Request: camlimages - OCaml image processing 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: camlimages - OCaml image processing library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235805
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 08:52 EST ---
MUST:
=
0 rpmlint output is:
W: camlimages ocaml-naming-policy-not-applied
/usr/lib/ocaml/camlimages/dllci_freetype.so
W: camlimages-devel ocaml-naming-policy-not-applied
/usr/lib/ocaml/camlimages/Makefile.config
* Package and spec file named appropriately
* Packaged according to packaging guidelines
* License ok
* spec file is legible and in Am. English.
* Source matches upstream
* Compiles and builds on devel i386
* BR: ok
* No locales
0 No shared libraries, ldconfig not needed
* Not relocatable
* Package owns / or requires all dirs
* No duplicate files Permissions ok
* %clean macro usage OK
* Contains code only
* %doc does not affect runtime, and isn't large enough to warrent a sub package
* -devel package as needed
* no .desktop file needed
MUST FIX
* rename to ocaml-images or ocaml-camlimages (will fix rpmlint warning, and the
latter is consistent with PLD)
* main package must require ocaml for /usr/lib/ocaml dir ownership
* remove the unnecessary ldconfig %post(un) scripts, this are not normally
libs and since they are not installed in a path searched by ldconfig, calling
ldconfig is useless.
* The .so files should be installed under /usr/lib/ocaml/stublibs
Should Fix
==
* Please just list all the features one after the other seperated with ',', I
don't think all rpm (gui) tools will preserve your formatting, so better to
not format at all.
* Stop the obfuscated double %setup usage, instead of the 2 lines you can just
write: %setup -q -n camlimages-2.2 -a 1
* Once the .so files are under %{_libdir}/ocaml/stublibs, the
files for %devel can be written as just %{_libdir}/ocaml/camlimages/
* also please always make all your %files entries like this:
%files
%defattr()
%doc ...
other files and dirs
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238863] New: Review Request: avant-window-mananger - Fully customisable dock-like window navigator for GNOME
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=238863 Summary: Review Request: avant-window-mananger - Fully customisable dock-like window navigator for GNOME Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/avant-window-navigator.spec SRPM URL: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/avant-window-navigator-0.1.1-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: Avant Window Navgator (Awn) is a dock-like bar which sits at the bottom of the screen (in all its composited-goodness) tracking open window. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 231859] Review Request: scratchpad - Spatial text editor for the GNOME desktop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: scratchpad - Spatial text editor for the GNOME desktop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=231859 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 11:34 EST --- Added patch for Hidden=true to .desktop file: SPEC: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/scratchpad.spec SRPM: http://folk.ntnu.no/sindrb/packages/scratchpad-0.3.0-3.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 238824] Review Request: schismtracker - sound module composer/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: schismtracker - sound module composer/player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238824 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 11:41 EST --- - MIME type associations missing from .desktop file, suggested: MimeType=audio/x-mod;audio/x-s3m;audio/x-stm;audio/x-it;audio/x-xm; Remember update-desktop-database too, see Packaging/ScriptletSnippets in Wiki - Menu entry icon missing - install a bunch of different sizes from icons/ subdirs to /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*? - What are the libXau-devel and libXdmcp-devel build dependencies used for? - Missing build dependencies: libXt-devel, libXxf86misc-devel, libXv-devel - %configure --disable-dependency-tracking for cleaner build output and possibly a slight build speedup? - Separate creation of the applications dir shouldn't be needed, I think desktop-file-install takes care of it. - Shouldn't COPYING.frag-opt and COPYING.libmodplug be included in %doc? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235805] Review Request: camlimages - OCaml image processing 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: camlimages - OCaml image processing library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235805 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 227241] Review Request: kde-settings - KDE default configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kde-settings - KDE default configuration Alias: kde-settings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227241 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: kde-settings|Review Request: kde-settings |- Config files for kde |- KDE default configuration Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 12:01 EST --- SRPM: http://apt.kde-redhat.org/apt/kde-redhat/SRPMS/kde-settings-3.5-20.fc7.src.rpm New Package CVS Request === Package Name: kde-settings Short Description: KDE default configuration Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238691] Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238691
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 12:52 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[x] Rpmlint output: None
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: Artistic
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: 45926441d247f72778a01092f6a83743
MD5SUM upstream package: 45926441d247f72778a01092f6a83743
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR:
Arches excluded:
Why:
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[-] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== Issues ===
1. Since the package has a test suite, I would highly recommend adding a %check
section to the spec file with make test (use a conditional if you want, but
deault to on for he buildsystem). You can add this post import.
=== Final Notes ===
1.
*** 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 233423] Review Request: python-mecab - Python binding for MeCab
Please 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-mecab - Python binding for MeCab https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233423 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:00 EST --- Well, I must re-read the build procedure because currently I have not caught up with what is actually changed during plague - koji buildsys change... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 237352] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options
Please 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-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options Alias: perl-MooseX-Getopt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237352 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:10 EST --- If you don't mind, throw up a 0.03 srpm and I will mockbuild it and check the md5 sigs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 237352] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options
Please 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-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options Alias: perl-MooseX-Getopt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237352 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:16 EST --- SRPM URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-MooseX-Getopt-0.03-1.fc6.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://home.comcast.net/~ckweyl/perl-MooseX-Getopt.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 237352] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options
Please 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-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options Alias: perl-MooseX-Getopt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237352 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:23 EST --- [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. MD5SUM this package: 4c925eaa9d071ff58b97ba26a5d29b18 MD5SUM upstream package: 4c925eaa9d071ff58b97ba26a5d29b18 All other issues went away :) *** 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 237352] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options
Please 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-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options Alias: perl-MooseX-Getopt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237352 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:27 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-MooseX-Getopt Short Description: Moose role for processing command line options Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-5, FC-6, devel InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238691] Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238691 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:37 EST --- I'll add the check, 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 238691] Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238691 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:50 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: qsf Short Description: Quick Spam Filter Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-5 FC-6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 234786] Review Request: perl-Email-MIME-Creator - Email::MIME constructor for starting anew
Please 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-Email-MIME-Creator - Email::MIME constructor for starting anew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234786 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 13:50 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Email-MIME-Creator Short Description: Email::MIME constructor for starting anew Owners: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Branches: FC-5 FC-6 InitialCC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225010] Review Request: glob2 - An innovative RTS 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: glob2 - An innovative RTS game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=225010 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 14:07 EST --- Rafal, Ping? I can review this for you, but first please provide an updated spec / srpm for the latest upstream version (23 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 224254] Review Request: bos - Real-time strategy game using the Stratagus game engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bos - Real-time strategy game using the Stratagus game engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 14:09 EST --- Peter, ping? I'm willing to review this for you, but first please provide a new srpm based on the latest upstream release, using the included stratagus fork. Since this is clearly different (and becoming more different every release) from the stand-alone stratagus project, it is ok to include the private fork. Just like is done with many games which come with modded quake engines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238270] Review Request: widelands - realtime-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: widelands - realtime-strategy game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238270 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 14:18 EST --- Karol, I can do a full / official review on this if you want. I would appreciate it if you would review a (small) package of mine in return: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237813 About the -data package, NP is correct, when its in the same tarbal as the engine there is no use in having the data in a subpackage. If it was in a seperate tarbal then that would need to be in its own srpm, and those should circular depend on each other, so that if one gets removed the other also gets 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 229098] Review Request: openjpeg - JPEG 2000 codec 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: openjpeg - JPEG 2000 codec library Alias: openjpeg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229098 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 233946] Review Request: secondlife - The Second Life client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: secondlife - The Second Life client Alias: secondlife https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=233946 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235741] Review Request: hippo-canvas - Crossplatform canvas using cairo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: hippo-canvas - Crossplatform canvas using cairo
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235741
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 14:48 EST ---
Thanks for the comments, I've fixed most of these issues I believe, with the
exception of the doc warnings for hippo-canvas-{devel,python}; just talked with
Havoc about the LICENSE and we're going to make it plain LGPL I think.
A new version should be uploaded 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 238824] Review Request: schismtracker - sound module composer/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: schismtracker - sound module composer/player https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238824 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||i) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 15:14 EST --- First, thanks for the review. (In reply to comment #1) - MIME type associations missing from .desktop file, suggested: MimeType=audio/x-mod;audio/x-s3m;audio/x-stm;audio/x-it;audio/x-xm; Ok, I also added the audio/x-669-mod and audio/x-mtm. Remember update-desktop-database too, see Packaging/ScriptletSnippets in Wiki Done. - Menu entry icon missing - install a bunch of different sizes from icons/ subdirs to /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*? Done. - What are the libXau-devel and libXdmcp-devel build dependencies used for? ldd says schismtracker is dependent on them, so I listed them explicitely. - Missing build dependencies: libXt-devel, libXxf86misc-devel, libXv-devel These seem to be brought by SDL-devel. - %configure --disable-dependency-tracking for cleaner build output and possibly a slight build speedup? Done. - Separate creation of the applications dir shouldn't be needed, I think desktop-file-install takes care of it. the useless install is now removed. - Shouldn't COPYING.frag-opt and COPYING.libmodplug be included in %doc? Added. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238824] Review Request: schismtracker - sound module composer/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: schismtracker - sound module composer/player
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238824
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED
Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]|
|i) |
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 17:08 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Please bump the release tag always when making changes to packages, even while
they're in review. Makes it a less PITA to track progress and compare changes.
Regarding the release tag, the common form for pre-release packages is eg.
0.X.rc1, not 0.Xrc1 as in this package. Not a big deal though, but I'd suggest
changing it.
- MIME type associations missing from .desktop file, suggested:
MimeType=audio/x-mod;audio/x-s3m;audio/x-stm;audio/x-it;audio/x-xm;
Ok, I also added the audio/x-669-mod and audio/x-mtm.
This seems to have slipped the SRPM build, there's no MimeType included in the
*.desktop in it.
- Menu entry icon missing - install a bunch of different sizes from icons/
subdirs to /usr/share/icons/hicolor/*?
Done.
Ok, but %{_datadir}/icons/* results in ownership of a lot of dirs commonly owned
by other packages. Does any of this package's dependencies bring in
hicolor-icon-theme? If yes, the dir/file ownership should be changed to
something like %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/*x*/apps/%{name}.png
Icon=%{name} or something similar should be added to the desktop file.
gtk-update-icon-cache missing, see
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#head-7103f6c38d1b5735e8477bdd569ad73ea2c49bda
- What are the libXau-devel and libXdmcp-devel build dependencies used for?
ldd says schismtracker is dependent on them, so I listed them explicitely.
My ldd on FC6 x86_64 doesn't, and I don't see anything in the sources that would
use them. Which distro version and arch did you use for building your package
that shows those deps? Perhaps there's something causing unneeded lib
dependency bloat there.
- Missing build dependencies: libXt-devel, libXxf86misc-devel, libXv-devel
These seem to be brought by SDL-devel.
Not on FC6 x86_64.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235804] Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235804
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 17:09 EST ---
(In reply to comment #10)
MUST FIX
* Change Source0 from:
http://optusnet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/ocamlsdl/ocamlsdl-0.7.2.tar.gz
to the generic sf download url, and use %{version}:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/ocamlsdl/ocamlsdl-%{version}.tar.gz
Done
* main package must require ocaml for /usr/lib/ocaml/stublibs dir ownership
Done
* remove the unnecessary ldconfig %post(un) scripts, this are not normally
libs and since they are not installed in a path searched by ldconfig,
calling
ldconfig is useless.
True, good point, done
Should Fix
==
* Stop the obfuscated double %setup usage, instead of the 2 lines you can just
write: %setup -q -n ocamlsdl-%{version} -a 1
I was fighting that one for a ittle while, thanks
* No need to write:
%dir %{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl/*.*a
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl/*.cmi
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl/*.cmx
Instead you can just write:
%{_libdir}/ocaml/sdl
If there were files there which you wouldn't include with the wildcards,
then rpmbuild would refuse to build the rpm as there would be files in
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT, which aren't listed under any %files.
Which is handy, because the build won't complete if something changes for the
worst (i.e. more unneeded output, but I see your point)
* also please always make all your %files entries like this:
%files
%defattr()
%doc ...
other files and dirs
Done
--
Spec URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/ocaml-SDL.spec
SRPM URL: http://dev.nigelj.com/SRPMS/ocaml-SDL-0.7.2-5.src.rpm
In about 10 mins
* Fri May 04 2007 Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 0.7.2-5
- Minor fixups per review
--
I've also added the ocaml dependency as suggested on Bug #235805
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235804] Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-SDL - OCaml bindings for SDL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235804 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 17:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) (In reply to comment #10) MUST FIX * remove the unnecessary ldconfig %post(un) scripts, this are not normally libs and since they are not installed in a path searched by ldconfig, calling ldconfig is useless. True, good point, done While I said done, I omitted it from the srpm, I've removed it from my local copy, however. Would you like another upload? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226528] Merge Review: virt-manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: virt-manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226528 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226528] Merge Review: virt-manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: virt-manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226528 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226348] Merge Review: python-virtinst
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: python-virtinst https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 237813] Review Request: taxipilot - Game where you pilot a taxi in space
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: taxipilot - Game where you pilot a taxi in space
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237813
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 17:45 EST ---
1. rpmlint returns
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-development-i386-core/result
W: taxipilot dangling-symlink /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/taxipilot/common
/usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common
W: taxipilot symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/taxipilot/common
/usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common
E: taxipilot zero-length /usr/share/apps/taxipilot/game_data/game_data_tag
2. Data files (maps, pixmaps, sounds) go in %{_datadir}/%{name} , not
%{_datadir}/games/%{name} . According to the FHS, the use of /usr/share/games is
optional, and we recommend not using it for consistency so that games are
packaged like all other applications.
In the rpm, datafiles are in /usr/share/apps. Please check it.
3. Installed .desktop files MUST follow the [desktop-entry-spec], paying
particular attention to validating correct usage of Name, GenericName,
[Categories], [StartupNotify] entries.
In .desktop is not defined GenericName and the shortcut is after installation in
Games without any category, check it.
4. - MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
There is %{_libdir}/libEXT_wavpo.la
5. Add NEWS to %doc, please.
I did not check all require items, but these should be checked/fixed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226528] Merge Review: virt-manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: virt-manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226528 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 18:03 EST --- Review is based on http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/virt-manager/0.4.0/1.fc7/src/virt-manager-0.4.0-1.fc7.src.rpm Overall, specfile looks good, conforms with packaging guidelines rpmlint reports: W: virt-manager non-conffile-in-etc /etc/security/console.apps/virt-manager W: virt-manager non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/virt-manager.schemas W: virt-manager non-conffile-in-etc /etc/pam.d/virt-manager The pam.d file should be marked as %config(noreplace); the others seem ok W: virt-manager symlink-should-be-relative /usr/bin/virt-manager /usr/bin/consolehelper Easy fix E: virt-manager explicit-lib-dependency librsvg2 It seems that that is ok; AFAICT, rpm won't be able to find this dependency. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 234787] Review Request: perl-Email-Reply - Reply to an email message
Please 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-Email-Reply - Reply to an email message Alias: perl-Email-Reply https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234787 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-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 226348] Merge Review: python-virtinst
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: python-virtinst https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226348 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 18:25 EST --- Review based on http://koji.fedoraproject.org/packages/python-virtinst/0.103.0/3.fc7/src/python-virtinst-0.103.0-3.fc7.src.rpm Specfile looks ok overall. Small comments - Not strictly necessary here, but we encourage people to use %global instead of %define in spec files (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define) - Source0 needs to be a complete URL to the released source tarball - Should the provide of virtinst be versioned ? rpmlint says: E: python-virtinst non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/virtinst/ParaVirtGuest.py 0644 E: python-virtinst non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/virtinst/DistroManager.py 0644 E: python-virtinst non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/virtinst/Guest.py 0644 E: python-virtinst non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/virtinst/FullVirtGuest.py 0644 E: python-virtinst non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/virtinst/util.py 0644 Strip the #!/usr/bin/python from those files; seems unnecessary, anyway W: python-virtinst obsolete-not-provided python-xeninst Should be fixed -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235805] Review Request: camlimages - OCaml image processing 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: camlimages - OCaml image processing library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235805
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 18:29 EST ---
(In reply to comment #6)
MUST:
=
0 rpmlint output is:
W: camlimages ocaml-naming-policy-not-applied
/usr/lib/ocaml/camlimages/dllci_freetype.so
W: camlimages-devel ocaml-naming-policy-not-applied
/usr/lib/ocaml/camlimages/Makefile.config
Ignorable (it actually doesn't happen on a F7 box)
MUST FIX
* rename to ocaml-images or ocaml-camlimages (will fix rpmlint warning, and
the
latter is consistent with PLD)
I tend to disagree, but I'm going to hold off uploading an updated spec, so I
can make a better judgement.
* main package must require ocaml for /usr/lib/ocaml dir ownership
Done
* remove the unnecessary ldconfig %post(un) scripts, this are not normally
libs and since they are not installed in a path searched by ldconfig,
calling
ldconfig is useless.
Done
* The .so files should be installed under /usr/lib/ocaml/stublibs
Done
Should Fix
==
* Please just list all the features one after the other seperated with ',', I
don't think all rpm (gui) tools will preserve your formatting, so better to
not format at all.
Done
* Stop the obfuscated double %setup usage, instead of the 2 lines you can just
write: %setup -q -n camlimages-2.2 -a 1
Per ocaml-SDL review, I had trouble getting to work, but done
* Once the .so files are under %{_libdir}/ocaml/stublibs, the
files for %devel can be written as just %{_libdir}/ocaml/camlimages/
Done
* also please always make all your %files entries like this:
%files
%defattr()
%doc ...
other files and dirs
Done
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238932] New: Review Request: python-decoratortools - Use class and function decorators -- even in Python 2.3
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=238932 Summary: Review Request: python-decoratortools - Use class and function decorators -- even in Python 2.3 Product: Fedora Extras Version: devel Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: fedora-package-review@redhat.com Spec URL: http://lewk.org/python-decoratortools.spec SRPM URL: http://lewk.org/python-decoratortools-1.4-1.fc7.src.rpm Description: Want to use decorators, but still need to support Python 2.3? Wish you could have class decorators, decorate arbitrary assignments, or match decorated function signatures to their original functions? Then you need DecoratorTools -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229250] Review Request: koji - Build system tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: koji - Build system tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|normal |medium [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 18:37 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: koji New Branches: FC-5 EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 229250] Review Request: koji - Build system tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: koji - Build system tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=229250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 226348] Merge Review: python-virtinst
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: python-virtinst https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226348 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 19:25 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) - Should the provide of virtinst be versioned ? Can't hurt. W: python-virtinst obsolete-not-provided python-xeninst Should be fixed python-xeninst _isn't_ provided, though. That API was 'import xeninst'. At this point, we can probably just drop the obsolete entirely, though. python-xeninst was the name before we made it more generic as virtinst. But that was only ever in 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 235802] Review Request: remind - Sophisticated calendar and alarm program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: remind - Sophisticated calendar and alarm program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235802 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 20:29 EST --- Thanks for the review Mamoru. I have implemented your MUST FIX entries above and am communicating with the remind developers as to artwork that could be used for a tkremind icon. The www package I was not intending to include at all in the RPM. If you think I should, I suppose it should be a separate -www or -web subpackage. And I will work on getting sponsored as well. Thanks for your guidance! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238366] Review Request: autodownloader - GUI-tool to automate the download of certain 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: autodownloader - GUI-tool to automate the download of certain files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238366 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 237739] Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed Alias: perl-File-Modified https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237739 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 237340] Review Request: python-BeautifulSoup - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping
Please 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-BeautifulSoup - HTML/XML parser for quick-turnaround applications like screen-scraping https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237340 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 234786] Review Request: perl-Email-MIME-Creator - Email::MIME constructor for starting anew
Please 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-Email-MIME-Creator - Email::MIME constructor for starting anew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234786 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 238691] Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qsf - Quick Spam Filter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238691 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 237352] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options
Please 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-MooseX-Getopt - Moose role for processing command line options Alias: perl-MooseX-Getopt https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237352 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 227241] Review Request: kde-settings - KDE default configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: kde-settings - KDE default configuration Alias: kde-settings https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=227241 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 21:19 EST --- Done. In koji, rdieter is the owner of the package. I'm not sure how to add than yet so Rex will have to do builds until someone figures it out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 234787] Review Request: perl-Email-Reply - Reply to an email message
Please 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-Email-Reply - Reply to an email message Alias: perl-Email-Reply https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234787 Bug 234787 depends on bug 234786, which changed state. Bug 234786 Summary: Review Request: perl-Email-MIME-Creator - Email::MIME constructor for starting anew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234786 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|NEW |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 234786] Review Request: perl-Email-MIME-Creator - Email::MIME constructor for starting anew
Please 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-Email-MIME-Creator - Email::MIME constructor for starting anew https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234786 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 21:20 EST --- 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 235636] Review Request: pipepanic - A pipe connecting 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: pipepanic - A pipe connecting game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235636 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 238373] Review Request: libopenraw - decode camera RAW 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: libopenraw - decode camera RAW files. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238373 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 238643] Review Request: perl-Declare-Constraints-Simple - Declarative Validation of Data Structures
Please 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-Declare-Constraints-Simple - Declarative Validation of Data Structures https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238643 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 237742] Review Request: perl-Text-SimpleTable - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables
Please 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-Text-SimpleTable - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables Alias: Text-SimpleTable https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237742 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 238932] Review Request: python-decoratortools - Use class and function decorators -- even in Python 2.3
Please 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-decoratortools - Use class and function
decorators -- even in Python 2.3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238932
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 21:44 EST ---
First glance, this line looks suspect::
%dir %{python_sitelib}/peak/util/decorators.py*
Usually I'd say that we should package peak in order to get the peak/util/
directory. But it appears that peak is serving as a namespace package for
decoratortools so I'm not sure what the proper thing to do is. decoratortools
doesn't acutally require anything else provided by peak, just the directory
structure
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235790] Review Request: perl-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing
Please 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-CGI-Prototype - Create a CGI application by subclassing Alias: perl-CGI-Prototype https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235790 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 235471] Review Request: perl-PDF-API2 - Perl module for creation and modification of PDF files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-PDF-API2 - Perl module for creation and modification of PDF files Alias: perl-PDF-API2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235471 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 235960] Review Request: perl-Data-Visitor - Visitor style traversal of Perl data structures
Please 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-Data-Visitor - Visitor style traversal of Perl data structures Alias: perl-Data-Visitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 197420] Review Request: php-pear-Payment-Process - Unified payment processor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-Payment-Process - Unified payment processor Alias: pear-Payment-Process https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=197420 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 234940] Review Request: perl-Image-Math-Constrain - Scaling math used in image size constraining (such as thumbnails)
Please 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-Image-Math-Constrain - Scaling math used in image size constraining (such as thumbnails) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234940 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-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 234939] Review Request: perl-Affix-Infix2Postfix - Perl extension for converting from infix notation to postfix notation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Affix-Infix2Postfix - Perl extension for converting from infix notation to postfix notation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234939 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs- --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 22:25 EST --- Erm... I think someone forgot to set the cvsadmin flag to done on this. If you still need something from CVS, just set the flag again -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235741] Review Request: hippo-canvas - Crossplatform canvas using cairo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hippo-canvas - Crossplatform canvas using cairo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235741 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 23:07 EST --- Yes, looks fine. Approved. I guess you need a sponsor now to get the package actually built. Of the desktop team, I know that at least alex is a sponsor, so you may want to ask him for sponsorship. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 235471] Review Request: perl-PDF-API2 - Perl module for creation and modification of PDF files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-PDF-API2 - Perl module for creation and modification of PDF files Alias: perl-PDF-API2 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235471 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 23:16 EST --- Building, 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 234787] Review Request: perl-Email-Reply - Reply to an email message
Please 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-Email-Reply - Reply to an email message
Alias: perl-Email-Reply
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234787
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 23:33 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[x] Rpmlint output: None
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL or Artistic
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: ea39a4a73d0b8cc54a28d6e84327413e
MD5SUM upstream package: ea39a4a73d0b8cc54a28d6e84327413e
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch, OR:
Arches excluded:
Why:
[!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are
listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[-] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[-] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: FC-6 / i386
[-] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on:
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
=== Issues ===
1. Missing BRs perl(Email::Simple), perl(Email::Simple::Creator),
perl(Email::Date)
=== Final Notes ===
1. Fix missing BRs post-import.
*** 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 237739] Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed Alias: perl-File-Modified https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237739 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 23:43 EST --- Imported and building. I think. 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 237739] Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed Alias: perl-File-Modified https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237739 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |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 238211] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Runtime - Catalyst core modules
Please 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-Catalyst-Runtime - Catalyst core modules Alias: Catalyst-Runtime https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238211 Bug 238211 depends on bug 237739, which changed state. Bug 237739 Summary: Review Request: perl-File-Modified - Checks intelligently if files have changed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237739 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|NEW |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 235960] Review Request: perl-Data-Visitor - Visitor style traversal of Perl data structures
Please 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-Data-Visitor - Visitor style traversal of Perl data structures Alias: perl-Data-Visitor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-03 23:46 EST --- Imported and building... 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 238233] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Plugin-ConfigLoader - Load config files of various types
Please 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-Catalyst-Plugin-ConfigLoader - Load config files of various types https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238233 Bug 238233 depends on bug 235960, which changed state. Bug 235960 Summary: Review Request: perl-Data-Visitor - Visitor style traversal of Perl data structures https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=235960 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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 224254] Review Request: bos - Real-time strategy game using the Stratagus game engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bos - Real-time strategy game using the Stratagus game engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=224254 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-04 00:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) Peter, ping? Still here! I'm willing to review this for you, but first please provide a new srpm based on the latest upstream release, using the included stratagus fork. Since this is clearly different (and becoming more different every release) from the stand-alone stratagus project, it is ok to include the private fork. Just like is done with many games which come with modded quake engines. OK. I'll do it in a couple of days. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 238932] Review Request: python-decoratortools - Use class and function decorators -- even in Python 2.3
Please 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-decoratortools - Use class and function decorators -- even in Python 2.3 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=238932 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-05-04 00:28 EST --- Oops, I didn't mean to put that %dir there. I removed it and updated the spec/srpm. As for the peak namespace, it would be nice to have something else provide the peak/util, but I don't really see it as too big of a deal -- however, I'm not on the packaging committee.. so it's your call :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
