[Bug 437918] Review Request: perl-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables
Please 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-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables Alias: perl-Devel-LexAlias https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437918 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-18 02:58 EST --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=520466 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 7fe986f50b467fa8575a67f0729fbb1d Devel-LexAlias-0.04.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=11, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.03 cusr + 0.00 csys = 0.03 CPU) + Package perl-Devel-LexAlias-0.04-1.fc9 => Provides: LexAlias.so perl(Devel::LexAlias) = 0.04 Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) perl >= 0:5.005003 perl(Devel::Caller) perl(DynaLoader) rtld(GNU_HASH) APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437917] Review Request: perl-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases
Please 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-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases Alias: perl-Array-RefElem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437917 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-18 02:57 EST --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=520459 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 43ff2dd2049258634cb00697198572d1 Array-RefElem-1.00.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + make test gave All tests successful. Files=1, Tests=5, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.00 cusr + 0.00 csys = 0.00 CPU) + Package perl-Array-RefElem-1.00-1.fc9 => Provides: RefElem.so perl(Array::RefElem) = 1.00 Requires: libc.so.6 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) perl(DynaLoader) perl(Exporter) perl(strict) perl(vars) rtld(GNU_HASH) APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437923] New: Review Request: perl-Test-WWW-Mechanize-Catalyst - Test::WWW::Mechanize for Catalyst
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/show_bug.cgi?id=437923 Summary: Review Request: perl-Test-WWW-Mechanize-Catalyst - Test::WWW::Mechanize for Catalyst Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Test-WWW-Mechanize-Catalyst/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPM URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Test-WWW-Mechanize-Catalyst-0.41-1.fc8.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Test-WWW-Mechanize-Catalyst.spec Description: Catalyst is an elegant MVC Web Application Framework. Test::WWW::Mechanize is a subclass of WWW::Mechanize that incorporates features for web application testing. The Test::WWW::Mechanize::Catalyst module meshes the two to allow easy testing of Catalyst applications without starting up a web server. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437923] Review Request: perl-Test-WWW-Mechanize-Catalyst - Test::WWW::Mechanize for Catalyst
Please 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-Test-WWW-Mechanize-Catalyst - Test::WWW::Mechanize for Catalyst https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437923 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-18 02:29 EST --- Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=520520 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436239] Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436239 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-18 02:11 EST --- New URLs: Spec URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/joda-time.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/joda-time-1.5.2-3.tzdata2008a.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437919] New: Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Controller-BindLex - Stash your lexical goodness
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/show_bug.cgi?id=437919 Summary: Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Controller-BindLex - Stash your lexical goodness Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Catalyst-Controller-BindLex/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPM URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Catalyst-Controller-BindLex-0.03-1.fc8.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Catalyst-Controller-BindLex.spec Description: This plugin lets you put your lexicals on the stash and elsewhere very easily. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437917] New: Review Request: perl-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases
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/show_bug.cgi?id=437917 Summary: Review Request: perl-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Array-RefElem/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPM URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Array-RefElem-1.00-1.fc8.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Array-RefElem.spec Description: This module gives direct access to some of the internal Perl routines that let you store things in arrays and hashes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437917] Review Request: perl-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases
Please 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-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases Alias: perl-Array-RefElem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437917 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||437919 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437918] New: Review Request: perl-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables
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/show_bug.cgi?id=437918 Summary: Review Request: perl-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Devel-LexAlias/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPM URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Devel-LexAlias-0.04-1.fc8.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-Devel-LexAlias.spec Description: Devel::LexAlias provides the ability to alias a lexical variable in a subroutines scope to one of your choosing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437918] Review Request: perl-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables
Please 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-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables Alias: perl-Devel-LexAlias https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437918 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||437919 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437917] Review Request: perl-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases
Please 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-Array-RefElem - Set up array elements as aliases Alias: perl-Array-RefElem https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437917 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-18 01:36 EST --- scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=520459 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437918] Review Request: perl-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables
Please 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-Devel-LexAlias - Alias lexical variables Alias: perl-Devel-LexAlias https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437918 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-18 01:37 EST --- scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=520466 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435598] Review Request: joni - Java regexp 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: joni - Java regexp library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435598 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 22:50 EST --- Well, actually for this package there is no issues to fix anymore. Also we can fix the existing Java packages once Java packaging guidelines are approved. Resetting fedora-review+. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435598] Review Request: joni - Java regexp 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: joni - Java regexp library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435598 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 21:19 EST --- See also: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-March/msg01484.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435598] Review Request: joni - Java regexp 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: joni - Java regexp library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435598 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO|197974 | nThis|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 21:12 EST --- Sorry, but there are a lot of Java packages in Fedora already, so I really don't see why this successfully-reviewed package shouldn't get imported! Once the draft guidelines are finalized, packages can be fixed if they don't conform to them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197974] Tracking bug for reviews stalled pending the adoption of guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Tracking bug for reviews stalled pending the adoption of guidelines Alias: F-GUIDELINES https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=197974 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn|435598 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435598] Review Request: joni - Java regexp 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: joni - Java regexp library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435598 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 21:13 EST --- Resetting fedora-cvs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436356] Review Request: openoffice.org-extendedPDF - Create PDF with hyperlinks, bookmarks and more
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: openoffice.org-extendedPDF - Create PDF with hyperlinks, bookmarks and more https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436356 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 20:11 EST --- >I don't think it's neccessary to wait for the formal adoption, we already have >two prior extensions packaged, it would seem unfair to treat this one >differently. Especially as the draft (modified with feedback over that time, >I'm >not complaining, it's a good thing) has been a draft for more that a month I >think so it could be a long wait until adoption. Well, we are blocking the java packages until guidelines are done... and there are a number of those already in. It would be a bit unfair to allow this in without approved guidelines while we are blocking all those I would think. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435598] Review Request: joni - Java regexp 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: joni - Java regexp library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435598 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] OtherBugsDependingO||197974 nThis|| Flag|fedora-review+, fedora-cvs? |fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 20:06 EST --- Well, as we don't have java guidelines yet, we shouldn't approve import java packages. I'm afraid I don't have much of a cite of this, but all of the obvious java packages are blocking F_GUIDELINES. Perhaps we could get someone from packaging to confirm that no new java packages should be reviewed/approved/imported until guidelines are complete? And perhaps the submitter and reviewer could work on getting the java package guidelines finalized? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 197974] Tracking bug for reviews stalled pending the adoption of guidelines
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Tracking bug for reviews stalled pending the adoption of guidelines Alias: F-GUIDELINES https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=197974 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||435598 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433915] Review Request: unison213 - File synchronization tool (compatibility package)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: unison213 - File synchronization tool (compatibility package) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 19:41 EST --- Well, because the GPL (all versions) includes: "If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation." The correct license tag here is "GPL+", ie, ANY version of the GPL, not just GPLv2. So, GPLv1, GPLv2, GPLv3, or any other version that exists or may exist. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433915] Review Request: unison213 - File synchronization tool (compatibility package)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: unison213 - File synchronization tool (compatibility package) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433915 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 19:24 EST --- Upstream says this: Well, the true answer is that we wanted an open-source license for all the usual reasons, chose GPLv2 because it was standard at the time, and then forgot about it. :-) I agree that the current state of affairs looks like "v2 and not later," strictly speaking. If this is preventing anyone from using or improving Unison, though, I'd be willing to consider changing. To avoid turning the Unison list into a GPL discussion forum, could people please communicate their opinions about this to me off-list? Thanks, - Benjamin -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436036] Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436036 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 18:56 EST --- Oops. Fixed Group of jna-javadocs: Spec URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/jna.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/jna-3.0.2-5.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433547] Review Request: nagios-nsca - nagios passive check daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: nagios-nsca - nagios passive check daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433547 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 18:52 EST --- You depending on the nagios package for both the client and server. Only server needs nagios itself installed. What about the nagios user? Since your compiling NSCA requiring the nagios using being present you'll need the user. This package should attempt to create the user and otherwise silently ignore if it exists already. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436036] Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436036 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 18:43 EST --- I addressed all the issues brought up in comments 7 and 8. New URLs: Spec URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/jna.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/jna-3.0.2-4.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253564] Review Request: ocaml-camomile - Unicode library for OCaml
Please 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-camomile - Unicode library for OCaml https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253564 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 18:32 EST --- There's some apparently upstream bug which is causing these random fatal errors on 64 bit platforms. I've asked the author if he can have a look. $ tools/parse_allkeys.opt database < unidata/tr10/allkeys.txt Fatal error: out of memory. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436239] Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436239 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 17:40 EST --- I have incorporated all of your suggestions in to my local spec except for those concerning tzdata (because I'm not done yet). I have tried in a number of different ways to use the system tzdata, but cannot seem to get that to work (it might work but needs love from someone who knows the ins and outs of java/ant). I will go ahead and use 2008a from your link, and include "tzdata2008a" in Release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437691] Review Request: monitor-edid - Tool for probing and parsing EDID
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monitor-edid - Tool for probing and parsing EDID https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437691 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 16:41 EST --- @Bill a solution could be to ask kevin to provide and lrmi version for x86_64 ? @Ville Argh, you're right. Spec URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/monitor-edid.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/monitor-edid-1.16-3.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226559] Merge Review: xhtml1-dtds
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: xhtml1-dtds https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226559 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 16:23 EST --- To resolve the looming deadlock, I'm approving this and already went ahead and requested a build of the current devel branch contents. My reasoning is that Daniel has looked into the changes, and if he had committed my patch, I'd also have approved the package and it would have been built pretty soon. So the only difference to that is that I happened to commit it with Daniel's approval which should really make no difference in my opinion with regards to reviewing the package. I'm also a co-maintainer nowadays. Everyone, please feel free to reopen and advice how to proceed (see comment 12) if you disagree with the way things were done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437691] Review Request: monitor-edid - Tool for probing and parsing EDID
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monitor-edid - Tool for probing and parsing EDID https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437691 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 16:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) > - Fix licenses : GPLv2 + MIT + DSB I still don't see anything GPLv2 in the package. AFAICT GPLv2 should be replaced by LGPLv2+, see COPYING included in the tarball and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437400] Review Request: msr-tools - tools to read/write processor model specific registers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: msr-tools - tools to read/write processor model specific registers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437400 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 16:03 EST --- spec updated with comments from 437397 srpm url changed to http://davej.fedorapeople.org/msr-tools-1.1.2-1.fc9.src.rpm thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437397] Review Request: pmtools - power management debugging 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: pmtools - power management debugging tools https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437397 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 15:59 EST --- Thanks for the review. (These comments are really helpful btw, I'm also fixing up some of my older packages to take your comments into account). I updated the spec at the url above. srpm url changed due to the %dist modification. It's now pmtools-20071116-1.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437801] Review Request: php-ZendFramework-manual-en - Documentation for the Zend Framework in English
Please 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-ZendFramework-manual-en - Documentation for the Zend Framework in English https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437801 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 13:56 EST --- Seems like I missed the final release just by a few minutes. Updated Spec URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-manual-en.spec Updated SRPM URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-manual-en-1.5.0-1.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437785] Review Request: php-ZendFramework-api-doc - Zend Framework API documentation
Please 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-ZendFramework-api-doc - Zend Framework API documentation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437785 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 13:56 EST --- Seems like I missed the final release just by a few minutes. Updated Spec URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-api-doc.spec Updated SRPM URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-api-doc-1.5.0-1.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 241596] Review Request: maildrop - Mail delivery agent with filtering abilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: maildrop - Mail delivery agent with filtering abilities https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=241596 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 13:54 EST --- Well - Please don't use http://prdownloads. URL so that we can download source directly by wget -N, for example. The following is fine. http://downloads.sourceforge.net/courier/maildrop-2.0.4.tar.bz2 - The license tag is okay with "GPLv2 with exceptions". (Current accepted license tags are listed in /usr/share/rpmlint/config). Other things are okay. This package (maildrop) is APPROVED by me -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 421241] Review Request: php-ZendFramework - Leading open-source PHP framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-ZendFramework - Leading open-source PHP framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=421241 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 13:53 EST --- Seems like I missed the final release just by a few minutes. Updated SPEC URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework.spec Updated SRPM URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-1.5.0-1.fc8.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436677] Review Request: xxdiff
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xxdiff https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436677 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 13:34 EST --- The tools sounds like a good idea I'll do that. I'll try your suggestion for the QT vars thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 351441] Review Request: php-pear-symfony - Open-Source PHP Web Framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-symfony - Open-Source PHP Web Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=351441 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DEFERRED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 13:26 EST --- Deferred until upstream ticket at http://trac.symfony-project.com/ticket/3144 gets either accepted and fixed or declined. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 266941] Review Request: php-pear-Phing - A project build system based on Apache Ant
Please 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-Phing - A project build system based on Apache Ant https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=266941 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 337791] Review Request: php-channel-symfony - Adds symfony project channel to PEAR
Please 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-channel-symfony - Adds symfony project channel to PEAR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=337791 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 337801] Review Request: php-pear-pake - PHP5 project builder system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-pake - PHP5 project builder system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=337801 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435155] Review Request: fuse-s3fs - Fuse filesystem for amazon.com's S3 storage service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fuse-s3fs - Fuse filesystem for amazon.com's S3 storage service https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435155 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 12:58 EST --- 1. Yeah, that will be correct on my next post of the spec/rpm file here 2. the only relevant output from rpmbuild -vv -ts is: D: fini 100600 1 ( 0, 0) 2077 /home/nhorman/rpmbuild/SPECS/fuse-s3fs.spec but if I untar the file, the permissions are 664. So it seems rpmbuild is doing this, but I don't know why. 3. I didn't think I'd need it either, but Mr. Matias was correct in comment 11, building in mock does produce that error, which the BuildRequires line fixes. If its not needed in koji itself, I'll happily remove it 4. I'll update that and it will be in my next spec/rpm post (once we decide what to do about the spec file mode issue). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245688] Review Request: python-pywbem - Python WBEM 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: python-pywbem - Python WBEM client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245688 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 245688] Review Request: python-pywbem - Python WBEM 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: python-pywbem - Python WBEM client https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245688 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433070] Review Request: java-1.6.0-openjdk - The OpenJDK 1.6.0 runtime environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: java-1.6.0-openjdk - The OpenJDK 1.6.0 runtime environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433070 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 12:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #22) > Should we open another bug for efforts to get that in EPEL, so we don't spam > people that were interested in review request into rawhide?(In reply to comment #27) (In reply to comment #27) > However, when installing Tomcat5 I get the following error : > Updating : tomcat5 ### [48/74] > /usr/bin/build-jar-repository: error: Could not find ecj Java extension for this JVM > /usr/bin/build-jar-repository: error: Some specified jars were not found for > this jvm Works for me, on fairly minimal RHEL-5. > > This failure makes it impossible to run a tomcat based web-application. I've > tried rebuilding eclipse(-ecj) against java-1.6.0-openjdk, but this fails. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436036] Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436036 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 12:15 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) > Currently, a -debuginfo package shouldn't be built at all (but I don't know > how > that is done). Please refer to: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Debuginfo section: "Useless or incomplete debuginfo packages due to other reasons" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435155] Review Request: fuse-s3fs - Fuse filesystem for amazon.com's S3 storage service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fuse-s3fs - Fuse filesystem for amazon.com's S3 storage service https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435155 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 12:12 EST --- 1. Cool. Thanks for tracking that down... it's important for sources to match up. 2. Yeah, I think I have seen this before, but not sure where and what causes it. ;( Whats your umask when you run the make? If you run the rpmbuild with '-vv' does it say why it's doing that? Any thoughts on items 3 and 4? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433070] Review Request: java-1.6.0-openjdk - The OpenJDK 1.6.0 runtime environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: java-1.6.0-openjdk - The OpenJDK 1.6.0 runtime environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433070 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 11:40 EST --- (In reply to comment #22) > Erik: Here's my build of openjdk for RHEL-5, with packages that are not in > EPEL: > [1]. I've just tried installing a fresh CentOS 5 system with your repo enabled during the installation and your packages were automatically pulled in. However, when installing Tomcat5 I get the following error : Updating : tomcat5 ### [48/74] /usr/bin/build-jar-repository: error: Could not find ecj Java extension for this JVM /usr/bin/build-jar-repository: error: Some specified jars were not found for this jvm This failure makes it impossible to run a tomcat based web-application. I've tried rebuilding eclipse(-ecj) against java-1.6.0-openjdk, but this fails. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437691] Review Request: monitor-edid - Tool for probing and parsing EDID
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monitor-edid - Tool for probing and parsing EDID https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437691 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 11:32 EST --- Augh, *another* LRMI/x86emu port? So this, radeontool, etc., etc. have to all include separate versions? Note that you really want to use x86emu everywhere. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436036] Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: jna - Pure Java access to native libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436036
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 10:41 EST ---
For 3.0.2-3:
* License
- License tag should be LGPLv2+
* BuildRequires
- BR: libffi is not needed as libffi-devel Requires libffi.
! Explicit Requires
- This package has explicit Requires: "Requires: libffi"
- For this package this cannot be avoided because
/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/find-requires cannot check the dependency
for the libraries packaged in jar file.
- However usually (i.e. for non-Java rpms) these type of
dependency should be detected automatically by find-requires
and this type of explicit Requires should not be written
So would you write a comment in the spec file why
this explicit Requires is needed?
(and this issue must be discussed on making Java packaging
guidelines)
* Requires
- Like joda-time, "Requires: %{name}-%{version}-%{release}"
is wrong.
? .zip file
- As far as I unzipped .zip files in jna tarball, all files in the zip
ball are text files.
However it this is not needed on rebuilding jna, please remove
these.
* Some rpmlint complaint
-
jna.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/jna-3.0.2/LICENSE.txt
jna.i386: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/share/doc/jna-3.0.2/LICENSE.txt
-
- The permission of LICENSE.txt should be 0644 and this file should
not have CRLF end-of-line encoding.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437801] New: Review Request: php-ZendFramework-manual-en - Documentation for the Zend Framework in English
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/show_bug.cgi?id=437801 Summary: Review Request: php-ZendFramework-manual-en - Documentation for the Zend Framework in English Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-manual-en.spec SRPM URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-manual-en-1.5.0-1.fc8.rc3.src.rpm Description: This package contains the reference manual for the Zend Framework in English. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435155] Review Request: fuse-s3fs - Fuse filesystem for amazon.com's S3 storage service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: fuse-s3fs - Fuse filesystem for amazon.com's S3 storage service https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435155 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 10:02 EST --- Ok, I've figured out the md5sum issue. The makefile that I use to generate the rpm and the release tarball had a bad dependency, and as such I was regenerating the source tarball when building the rpm. I've fixed that in my git tree. As for the spec file permission, I had noticed that too. I'm happy to change them, but I'm curious as to why its occuring in the first place. My makefile uses rpmbuild -ts on the tarball that I generated (which incudes the spec file. You'll note that the spec file in the tarball is mode 0664), but when rpmbuild -ts translates it into a src.rpm file, it adjusts the permissions to be 0600. I'm not sure why that would be, but I assumed that it was either a outdated check in rpmlint, or a bug in rpmbuild. Either way, I wasn't exactly sure what to do about it. I'd like to be able to use rpmsuild -ts to handle this, but am not sure what the proper fix is. Thoughts? Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437785] New: Review Request: php-ZendFramework-api-doc - Zend Framework API documentation
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/show_bug.cgi?id=437785 Summary: Review Request: php-ZendFramework-api-doc - Zend Framework API documentation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-api-doc.spec SRPM URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-api-doc-1.5.0-1.fc8.rc3.src.rpm Description: This package contains the Zend Framework API documentation generated in HTML by phpDocumentor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253564] Review Request: ocaml-camomile - Unicode library for OCaml
Please 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-camomile - Unicode library for OCaml https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253564 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 09:43 EST --- Spec URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-camomile.spec SRPM URL: http://annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-camomile-0.7.1-5.fc9.src.rpm * Mon Mar 17 2008 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.7.1-5 - Definitive license. - Move ./configure into the build section. - Remove a superfluous comment in the install section. - Fix rpmlint error 'configure-without-libdir-spec'. - Scratch build in Koji. * Wed Mar 5 2008 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.7.1-4 - License is LGPLv2+ (no OCaml exception). * Wed Mar 5 2008 Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.7.1-3 - Remove ExcludeArch ppc64. Koji build is failing at the moment on ppc64, apparently because it just runs out of memory. I built it on the other archs fine using: koji build --scratch --arch-override='i386 x86_64 ppc' dist-f9 \ ocaml-camomile-0.7.1-5.fc9.src.rpm which gives this result: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=519400 rpmlint is clean except for this which can be ignored: ocaml-camomile.x86_64: E: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 253564] Review Request: ocaml-camomile - Unicode library for OCaml
Please 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-camomile - Unicode library for OCaml https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=253564 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 08:59 EST --- Spot came up with the definitive reply here: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legal-list/2008-March/msg5.html I'm going to prepare a new package shortly with the right license and an explanation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433135] Review Request: anyremote - Bluetooth remote control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: anyremote - Bluetooth remote control https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433135 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 07:51 EST --- (In reply to comment #38) > Would you mail to accounts_AT_fedoraproject.org Thank You for advice! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 421241] Review Request: php-ZendFramework - Leading open-source PHP framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: php-ZendFramework - Leading open-source PHP framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=421241 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Keywords||Reopened Resolution|DEFERRED| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 07:18 EST --- Reopening. Updated SPEC URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework.spec Updated SRPM URL: http://akahl.fedorapeople.org/php-ZendFramework/php-ZendFramework-1.5.0-1.fc8.rc3.src.rpm -- Since 1.5.0 is about to reach stable, I'm using the release candidates series for now. All components are split up into subpackages with interdependencies resolved via manual search and unit tests applied. All components have virtual requires and provides in the php-Zend(x) namespace. All significant rpmlint warnings and errors refer to files that are needed by the unit tests (subpackage -tests) and must not be modified in the distribution, otherwise complex patches to the tests have to be created and maintained. One issue remaining is that some unit tests explicitly try to create a cache directory (grep for cache_dir) locally below their _files directories, thus failing. Simply symlinking each _files directory below /var/tmp/php-Zendframework is not a clean solution since most of those already contain static test data so maybe /var/lib would be a better candidate. Any suggestions here are welcome. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433135] Review Request: anyremote - Bluetooth remote control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: anyremote - Bluetooth remote control https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433135 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 07:02 EST --- Would you mail to accounts_AT_fedoraproject.org with your FAS name? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437481] Review Request: ocaml-newt - OCaml library for using newt text mode window system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-newt - OCaml library for using newt text mode window system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437481 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 06:29 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ocaml-newt Short Description: OCaml library for using newt text mode window system Owners: rjones Branches: F-8 InitialCC: rjones Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437481] Review Request: ocaml-newt - OCaml library for using newt text mode window system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-newt - OCaml library for using newt text mode window system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437481 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 06:27 EST --- I think I've made the configure-in-%prep mistake systematically ... Need to go and look at all the other ocaml packages. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433135] Review Request: anyremote - Bluetooth remote control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: anyremote - Bluetooth remote control https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433135 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 06:19 EST --- (In reply to comment #36) Thank You, now my status in cvsextras is Approved. But if i try to set "?" in fedora-cvs i've got: >Flag Modification Denied >You tried to request fedora-cvs. Only an authorized user can make this change. Umm... Did i miss somthing in configuration phase ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 432205] Review Request: exe - eXe eLearning XHTML editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: exe - eXe eLearning XHTML editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432205 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 05:28 EST --- I've done some more looking into the inclusing of cgi and jar files in eXe and I'm currently working on this with upstream, see: https://eduforge.org/forum/forum.php?thread_id=2150&forum_id=298 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436239] Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436239 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 04:12 EST --- Note: tzdata is Public Domain and you can freely use it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436239] Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: joda-time - Java date and time API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436239
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-03-17 03:52 EST ---
For 1.5.2-2:
* Requires
- For -javadocs subpackages:
-
Requires: %{name}-%{version}-%{release}
-
This must be %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
* src/testdata/
- The files under src/testdata seem binary (although
I can see almost all parts by less command).
If they can safely be igored, please remove all of
them at %prep (I don't know if they can be removed,
however even if they are removed joda-time compiles:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=519102 )
* tzdata
- This package uses tzdata (please check files under
src/java/org/joda/time/tz/src/) and the version is
2007k.
However from
ftp://elsie.nci.nih.gov/pub/
it seems current latest tzdata is 2008a (you can find
tzdata2008a.tar.gz from the URL above) and tzdata of Chile
is revised.
! Note
Current Fedora rawhide tzdata is also 2007k, however changelog
shows Fedora tzdata maintainer patched for Chilean tzdata
and essentially it is the same as 2008a.
The history of joda-time shows the upstream does not always
sync tzdata part with the URL above.
IMO
- This package should have tzdatax.tar.gz as Source(1,
for example) and override files under src/java/org/joda/time/tz/src/
by the files in tzdata tarball.
This means that you have to update joda-time every time
tzdata is updated (usually you can notice by Fedora tzdata update).
Also, in this case it is better that the EVR (Epoch-Version-Release)
of tzdata refects the version of tzdata used for joda-time
(say, 1.5.2-2.tzdata2008a.fc9?).
- Or are there any way thatjoda-time use contents in tzdata rpm
directly?
* Documents
- IMO it is better that the following files is added
to %doc.
-
RELEASE-NOTES.txt
ToDo.txt
-
* javadoc
- Mark both
-
%dir %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version}
%{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version}/*
-
as %doc.
! Note
The above two lines can be replaced by
-
%doc %{_javadocdir}/%{name}-%{version}/
-
The %files entry / (not %dir )
contains the directory itself and all files/directories/etc
under the directory.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
