[Bug 449869] Review Request: tasque - A simple task management app
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tasque - A simple task management app https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449869 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 02:55 EST --- ping? -- 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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 02:51 EST --- One note: Please remove unneeded autotool related BuildRequires (autoconf, automake). Also, BuildRequires: cairo-devel, gtk2-devel are somewhat redundant (always required by gtkmm24-devel) -- 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 447367] Review Request: onboard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: onboard https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447367 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 01:08 EST --- any updates here? -- 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 454960] Review Request: aubio - An audio labelling 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: aubio - An audio labelling library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||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 444511] Review Request: emma - Java code coverage tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: emma - Java code coverage tool https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444511 [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 225954] Merge Review: junit
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: junit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225954 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora Version|devel |rawhide AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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 225932] Merge Review: jakarta-commons-launcher
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: jakarta-commons-launcher https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225932 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |medium Priority|normal |medium Product|Fedora Extras |Fedora Version|devel |rawhide AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 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 222191] Review Request: eclipse - An open, extensible IDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: eclipse - An open, extensible IDE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=222191 [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 the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455211] Review Request: php-laconica - PHP tool for microblogging
Please 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-laconica - PHP tool for microblogging https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 23:22 EST --- As soon as 0.4.3 is tested and php-xmpphp next stable released I will update. May be few more days. -- 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 455211] New: Review Request: php-laconica - PHP tool for microblogging
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=455211 Summary: Review Request: php-laconica - PHP tool for microblogging Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Description: Laconica is an open source microblogging tool written in PHP. All data is stored in a MySQL database. Laconica was created as a direct response of a need to create an open source, distributed alternative to Twitter. Laconica implements the OpenMicroBlogging standard. SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/php-laconica-0.4.1-1.fc8.src.rpm SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/php-laconica.spec This is my 8th package and I am looking for sponsor Additional info: This review depends upon three bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=227190 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455039 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454395 laconica development is going in leaps and the current used is 0.4.3. But when this bug was filed it was still to be tested and it also used xmpphp svn checkout which is not released yet. -- 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 455039] Review Request: php-oauth - PHP Authentication library for desktop to web applications
Please 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-oauth - PHP Authentication library for desktop to web applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455039 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||455211 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 227190] Review Request: php-pear-Auth-OpenID - PHP OpenID
Please 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-Auth-OpenID - PHP OpenID https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=227190 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||455211 nThis|| -- 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. 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 454395] Review Request: php-xmpphp - PHP XMPP 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: php-xmpphp - PHP XMPP Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454395 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||455211 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 455210] New: Review Request: odfpy - Python library for manipulating OpenDocument files
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=455210 Summary: Review Request: odfpy - Python library for manipulating OpenDocument files 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://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/odfpy/0.7-1/odfpy.spec SRPM URL: http://ianweller.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/odfpy/0.7-1/odfpy-0.7-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Odfpy aims to be a complete API for OpenDocument in Python. Unlike other more convenient APIs, this one is essentially an abstraction layer just above the XML format. The main focus has been to prevent the programmer from creating invalid documents. It has checks that raise an exception if the programmer adds an invalid element, adds an attribute unknown to the grammar, forgets to add a required attribute or adds text to an element that doesn't allow it. These checks and the API itself were generated from the RelaxNG schema, and then hand-edited. Therefore the API is complete and can handle all ODF constructions, but could be improved in its understanding of data types. -- 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 454960] Review Request: aubio - An audio labelling 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: aubio - An audio labelling library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 23:01 EST --- cvs done. -- 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 455071] Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455071 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 23:03 EST --- cvs done. -- 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 369211] Review Request: monit - Manages and monitors processes, files, directories and devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monit - Manages and monitors processes, files, directories and devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=369211 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 22:57 EST --- cvs done. -- 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 426751] Review Request: ghc-X11 - A Haskell binding to the X11 graphics 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: ghc-X11 - A Haskell binding to the X11 graphics library. Alias: ghc-X11 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426751 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 22:21 EST --- (In reply to comment #10) > Please discuss this at the next meeting with the Packaging Committee. Yes, I have no objections to discussing there, but at the end of the day of course they know much less about Haskell packaging than the SIG does, so I expect they would accept any recommendation we make either way. I think it makes more sense to discuss it first on fedora-haskell-list and get consensus there. > I've asked them to review the guidelines, and this is one thing I want *them* > to > decide. Hmm, but they are still in draft state and we were supposed to finish these package reviews first but the guidelines would be ready... > There is definitely an ambiguity in the Fedora standards, no matter how > many times you say there aren't. I don't remember saying anything about the Fedora name standards - I said that naming of Haskell libraries tends to be pretty consistent (it is not like they use different casing in different places (like lowercase tarball, uppercase directory, mixed case module name or whatever). When there is consistent use of case in a project then that clearly indicates upstream thinks that that cased name is the correct name and there is no good reason for us to change that. X11 is such an example. Exceptions may occur and are indeed allowed by the Fedora Guidelines as you state and that is all ok, but it is not stop us from recommending Haskell libraries should follow the upstream naming as far as possible. -- 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 453017] Review Request: un-extra-fonts - Korean TrueType fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: un-extra-fonts - Korean TrueType fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453017 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 22:11 EST --- Hmm I think we should stick with un-core-fonts since that is what upstream calls them. Probably subpackaging un-extra-fonts is not necessary like un-core-fonts though. -- 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 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager Alias: awesome https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 20:39 EST --- libconfuse has been updated to 2.6 on my request back when I wanted to package awesome in bug 427530 and bug 427529 respectively, so that version requirement is definitely needed. For reference purposes, this might be useful (or not): http://ndim.fedorapeople.org/packages/awesome/2.1-1.fc8/awesome.spec -- 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 447751] Review Request: almanah - An application to allow you to keep a diary of your life
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: almanah - An application to allow you to keep a diary of your life https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447751 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 20:26 EST --- (In reply to comment #21) > > You should chown these files in %prep to fix these errors. Did I just say "chown"??? Of course I meant "chmod" ;) -- 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 447751] Review Request: almanah - An application to allow you to keep a diary of your life
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: almanah - An application to allow you to keep a diary of your life https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447751 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: almanah - A |Review Request: almanah - An |application to allow you to |application to allow you to |keep a diary of your life |keep a diary of your life --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 20:23 EST --- There is a typo in the summary: A application needs to be "An Application" or just "Application". -- 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 447751] Review Request: almanah - An application to allow you to keep a diary of your life
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: almanah - An application to allow you to keep a diary of your life https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447751 [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 447751] Review Request: almanah - A application to allow you to keep a diary of your life
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: almanah - A application to allow you to keep a diary
of your life
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447751
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 20:05 EST ---
Review for da202ef7a75b5d85a22b641eef0f61a2 almanah-0.4.0-1.fc9.src.rpm
FAIL - MUST: rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/almanah-*
almanah.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/almanah-0.4.0/README
almanah.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/almanah-0.4.0/AUTHORS
almanah.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/almanah-0.4.0/NEWS
almanah-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/almanah-0.4.0/src/main.c
almanah-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/almanah-0.4.0/src/main.h
almanah-debuginfo.i386: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/almanah-0.4.0/src/interface.c
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
You should chown these files in %prep to fix these errors.
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
Ok - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license (GPLv3+)
OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license
OK - MUST: License text from source is included in %doc
OK - MUST: The spec file is written in American English
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
md5 59cdbff0ba8e53d736011608aeb6a8e3
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on i386
OK - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires
OK - MUST: The spec file handles locales properly with %find_lang
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing
FAIL - MUST: Permissions on files are not set properly, see above
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissible content
OK - MUST: Files included in %doc do not affect the runtime of the application.
FIX? - Consider including ChangeLog, although it's not that important
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a %{name}.desktop
file that file is properly installed with desktop-file-install
FIX - The icon of the desktop file is still diary. To fix this:
sed -i 's!Icon=diary!Icon=almanah!' data/%{name}.desktop.in
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages
OK - MUST: The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install
OK - MUST: All filenames in the package are valid UTF-8
OK - SHOULD: The package builds in mock
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described. There are some issues with
encrypted databases, but we can troubleshoot them with upstream once this
package is imported and he is back from vacation
OK - SHOULD: Latest version of the package
NEEDSWORK
--
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 453847] Review Request: gpt - The Grid Packaging Toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gpt - The Grid Packaging Toolkit https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453847 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 19:58 EST --- In fact the renaming of the package cannot be done only in fedora, the naming guidelines mandate that the package is called gpt in that case. So upstream should be convinced to change the package name first. If it cannot be done it is not easy to know what to do, since gpt doesn't show up that high on a google search. I have put some thoughts about that issue on: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingTricks#Use_of_common_namespace -- 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 447751] Review Request: almanah - A application to allow you to keep a diary of your life
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: almanah - A application to allow you to keep a diary of your life https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447751 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||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 453264] Review Request: jscoverage - A tool that measures code coverage for JavaScript programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jscoverage - A tool that measures code coverage for JavaScript programs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453264 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||m) --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 19:12 EST --- Jesse, are you still interested in adding this to Fedora? -- 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 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome
floating and tiling window manager
Alias: awesome
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 18:51 EST ---
libconfuse-devel is listed twice in BuildRequires. It should
certainly be versionned in the BuildRequires too.
For the desktop file, I think that you should better call the
file %{name}.desktop and install it with a cp. The guidelines
are for .desktop files for use in menus. Also it seems to me
that type=application and Icon=awesome32 are wrong for a
xsession .desktop file. Also GenericName doesn't make much sense.
I would suggest using removing the doc installed as part of make
install and use %doc instead.
/usr/share/awesome/ and /usr/share/awesome/icons are unowned.
--
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 369211] Review Request: monit - Manages and monitors processes, files, directories and devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monit - Manages and monitors processes, files, directories and devices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=369211 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 18:38 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: monit New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 -- 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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 18:26 EST --- (In reply to comment #17) > (In reply to comment #16) > > The OpenGL > > interface looks really cool and works here and so I suggest to include it. > > What do you think? > > I agree with you, enabled now. Thought, that would be catched up automagically > once the dependency is satified, but it looks not as it would be the case. It is still experimental and has some bugs, nevertheless I think we should include it because it's not default and can do no harm. I leave the decision up to you. > Done, SRPM: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9.16-3.src.rpm OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license: GPLv3+ OK - MUST: BuildRequires sane OK - SHOULD: Description updated This program definitely has some serious bugs, but we can work on them with upstream once the package is in Fedora. From a reviewers point of view everything is fine, so this is 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 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 17:25 EST --- New rpmlint run: $ rpmlint mod_proxy_html.spec ../RPMS/i386/mod_proxy_html-3.0.1-5.fc8.i386.rpm mod_proxy_html.spec: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 47, tab: line 42) 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ -- 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 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #311551|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 17:22 EST --- Created an attachment (id=311672) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=311672&action=view) Replacement .src.rpm file -- 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 452636] Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mod_proxy_html - Module to rewrite content as it passes through an apache proxy. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452636 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #311550|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 17:23 EST --- Created an attachment (id=311673) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=311673&action=view) Replacement .spec file Fixed gcc warning about missing braces/ambiguous "else". -- 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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 17:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) > FAIL - MUST: The License field in the package spec file does not match the > actual license: Code is GPLv3+, but License tag is GPLv2+ > FAIL - MUST: License text from source is included in %doc, but the License is > out of date (GPLv2) Changed to GPLv3+ in the spec file, sent e-mail to upstream to correct that for the next upstream release. > FAIL - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, but > gtkglextmm-devel is only needed when building with --enable-opengl. The OpenGL > interface looks really cool and works here and so I suggest to include it. > What do you think? I agree with you, enabled now. Thought, that would be catched up automagically once the dependency is satified, but it looks not as it would be the case. > FIX - SHOULD: Please bug upstream to include an updated copy of the license > text. Done, see above and within your mailbox. > FIX? - SHOULD: Could you include a German translation of description and > summary? No not really, this is something for specspo package. > FIX - SHOULD: Typo in description: less -> least, consist -> consists. > IMHO the description could be simplified a little: I've taken your rewrite now, sounds better. Former description was taken from the Beldi website. > NEEDSWORK Done, SRPM: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9.16-3.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 454960] Review Request: aubio - An audio labelling 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: aubio - An audio labelling library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 17:14 EST --- Thanks! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: aubio Short Description: An audio labelling library Owners: green Branches: devel InitialCC: 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 454960] Review Request: aubio - An audio labelling 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: aubio - An audio labelling library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454960 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 16:59 EST --- Looks good now, 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 455071] Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455071 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 16:52 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: xfce4-mpc-plugin Short Description: MPD client for the Xfce panel Owners: cwickert Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: 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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 16:42 EST ---
Review for 145e2eb18b87a2dc7a12ce237c9c75c1 beldi-0.9.16-2.src.rpm:
OK - MUST: rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/beldi-*
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
Ok - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines
FAIL - MUST: The License field in the package spec file does not match the
actual license: Code is GPLv3+, but License tag is GPLv2+
FAIL - MUST: License text from source is included in %doc, but the License is
out of date (GPLv2)
OK - MUST: The spec file is written in American English
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
md5 420555ec522884dcb771c98c0960a1f5
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on i386
FAIL - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, but
gtkglextmm-devel is only needed when building with --enable-opengl. The OpenGL
interface looks really cool and works here and so I suggest to include it. What
do you think?
Pigment support (requires pigment-devel >= 0.3 and gstreamer-plugins-base-devel)
is still experimental and does not build here, so I suggest not to enable it.
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissible content
OK - MUST: Files included in %doc do not affect the runtime of the application
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a %{name}.desktop
file that file is properly installed with desktop-file-install
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages
OK - MUST: The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install
OK - MUST: All filenames in the package are valid UTF-8
FIX - SHOULD: Please bug upstream to include an updated copy of the license
text.
FIX? - SHOULD: Could you include a German translation of description and
summary?
FIX - SHOULD: Typo in description: less -> least, consist -> consists.
IMHO the description could be simplified a little:
->
BeLDi, the Belug (Linux) Distribution Burner, is a program designed to burn
distributions. It is designed to require the least administration and knowledge
as possible.
BeLDi has a intuitive graphic user interface where the main screen shows the
available distributions in a list. If the user selects one, he will be asked
which version and architecture he wants to burn. Once the burn procedure starts
a bar shows its progress. All user operations can be completed with the mouse or
a touchscreen.
<-
OK - SHOULD: The package builds in mock
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described
OK - SHOULD: Latest version of the application
So the only blocker is OpenGL. The license text is no real issue for me as long
as you fix the license tag in the spec.
NEEDSWORK
--
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 452663] Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452663 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 16:32 EST --- All done. Thanks to everyone involved -- 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 453082] Review Request: python-dtopt - Add options to doctest examples while they are running
Please 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-dtopt - Add options to doctest examples while they are running https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453082 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 16:11 EST --- python-dtopt-0.1-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9 -- 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 455152] Review Request: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling 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: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:53 EST --- The package has is being reworked so I have cancelled the review request. There is a stable verion I will work on to get it functional in Fedora. -- 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 455152] Review Request: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling 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: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455152 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX -- 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 454960] Review Request: aubio - An audio labelling 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: aubio - An audio labelling library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454960 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:30 EST --- Thanks for your comments Hans. Here we go again... Spec URL: http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/aubio.spec SRPM URL: http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/aubio-0.3.2-3.fc9.src.rpm AG -- 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 455071] Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455071 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:27 EST --- When you import is fine with me. I don't see any other issues, so this is 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 455153] Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455153 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:19 EST --- cvs done. -- 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 453082] Review Request: python-dtopt - Add options to doctest examples while they are running
Please 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-dtopt - Add options to doctest examples while they are running https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453082 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:13 EST --- This looks to be all done. Let me know if there is further action required. -- 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 452663] Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452663 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:10 EST --- cvs done. -- 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 455152] Review Request: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling 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: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling
Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455152
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:10 EST ---
1. Delete the commented out code
2. --prefix=/usr/ should be --prefix=%{_prefix}
3. Break description up into multiple lines. No line should be longer than 80
characters.
--
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 454960] Review Request: aubio - An audio labelling 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: aubio - An audio labelling library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454960
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:06 EST ---
I can still not approve this I'm afraid, it now fails to build on my system
with:
RPM build errors:
File not found by glob:
/var/tmp/aubio-0.3.2-2.fc10-root-hans/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/*.so
Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/_aubiowrapper.so
Notice the lib64 in the path it is looking for, which is correct, you use
%{python_sitearch}/%{name}/*.so
and sitearch is in lib64 on x86_64, and looking for the .so in sitearch is
correct, that is where it should be. So appearantly the aubio makefile gets this
wrong.
Note that it is allowed to put the entire python stuff in sitearch if it depends
upon a .so, so you could see if you can override the makefile install location
for the python stuff and just put it all in sitearch.
Also note that currently in your %files section, the %{python_sitearch}/%{name}
directory will be unowned when different from %{python_sitelib}/%{name}
Hmm, thinking some more about this, it would really be the cleanest to put all
of the python stuff in sitearch as it depends on a .so, if you cannot persuade
the makefile todo this you could use something like this after "make install":
if [ %{python_sitearch} != %{python_sitelib} ]; then
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitearch}
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitelib}/%{name} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{python_sitearch}
fi
This will also greatly simplify the %files for the -python package, that can
then become plain and simple:
%files python
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%{python_sitearch}/%{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 445261] Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 15:08 EST --- cvs done. -- 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 243831] Review Request: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rsyslog - the enhanced syslogd for Linux and Unix https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=243831 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? | -- 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 455152] Review Request: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling 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: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 14:46 EST --- The changes are made. Rpm and specfile can be found with the same links still. -- 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 455187] New: Review Request: erlang-pgsql - Erlang PostgreSQL interface
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=455187 Summary: Review Request: erlang-pgsql - Erlang PostgreSQL interface Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package- [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],lemenk [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/erlang-pgsql.spec SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/erlang-pgsql-0.0.0- 0.20080709svn.src.rpm Library that gives possibility to Erlang programs to connect PostgreSQL databases by plain tcp and execute simple SQL statements. As there are only a few erlang related packages within Fedora currently, I'm adding the people maintaining such packages there on Cc. Feel free to remove yourself if you feel bothered by me. -- 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 432259] Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on
OLPC XO
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432259
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 14:16 EST ---
Hi,
I need to do some conditional building for the OLPC-2 and OLPC-3 branches. For
example I want to build without pulseaudio and nas support for OLPC. So I would
like to remove the BUildRequires for nas and pulseaudio and also disable support
for nas and pulse-audio.
How can I go about detecting that I am building for the OLPC branch?
I tried a few scratch builds with KOJI for the following SRPM :
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=712818&name=speech-dispatcher-0.6.6-14.olpc2.src.rpm
It built successfully for the OLPC branch.
However, it failed for the F-9 branch with the following error:
*** Required Glib-2.0 library missing! See INSTALL .
This is how I am detecting that I am building for OLPC-2/3:
%if 1%{?olpc} >= 2
Buildrequires: nas-devel
Buildrequires: pulseaudio-lib-devel
%endif
And this is how I should be forcing to build without nas/pulse-audio support
although its a little different in the actual SRPM that I submitted for scratch
build):
%if 1%{?olpc} >= 2
%configure --disable-static
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%else
%configure --disable-static --without-nas --without-pulse
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%endif
Am I detecting the olpc branch correctly? Or is there some other problem?
Thanks,
Hemant
--
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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:57 EST --- Christoph, can you please review the package again? I think, I merged all of the changes and suggestions into one updated SRPM: SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9.16-2.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 245561] Review Request: ht - File editor/viewer/analyzer for executables
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ht - File editor/viewer/analyzer for executables https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245561 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:41 EST --- - Source Tag: NOT OK: I was wrong in comment #4, the correct sourceforge url is downloads.sourceforge... not download.sourceforge (it needs to be in plural). -- 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 455039] Review Request: php-oauth - PHP Authentication library for desktop to web applications
Please 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-oauth - PHP Authentication library for desktop to web applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455039 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:36 EST --- >- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. >Error, the package version doesn't meet the >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages >guidelines Fixed >Maybe the package has also to be renamed with the php-pear standard? See >https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2008-July/msg00023.html for the >discussion. Yes, I started the discussion, if you look at next message in thread https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2008-July/msg00041.html or oauth package status. It is still in proposed state and upstream does not have any pear packaging so it will go as normal php library. >- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as >provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no >upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL >Guidelines for how to deal with this. >Error, the creation of a source package matches >https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL "Using Revision Control", but >how can you pretend that it's version 1? SVN checkout doesn't work by the way. Aah! Actually project site mentions wrong svn checkout link. The correct one is svn co http://oauth.googlecode.com/svn/code/php/ oauth It is mentioned is one of main Oauth class in code base that it is 1.0. I have also verified upstream. New SPEC file: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/php-oauth.spec New SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/php-oauth-1.0-3.svn592.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 452663] Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452663 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:27 EST --- Michal Nowak: congratulation on your first package and first official review. Hope you'll do many more of them in the future. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: andika-fonts Short Description: A font for literacy and beginning readers Owners: nim Branches: devel only InitialCC: fonts-sig 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 455152] Review Request: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling 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: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:06 EST --- 5. Use macros for FHS paths -- 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 455039] Review Request: php-oauth - PHP Authentication library for desktop to web applications
Please 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-oauth - PHP Authentication library for desktop to web applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455039 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:01 EST --- This is not a formal review, but I noticed the following points when following the review guidelines: - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. Error, the package version doesn't meet the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Snapshot_packages guidelines Maybe the package has also to be renamed with the php-pear standard? See https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2008-July/msg00023.html for the discussion. - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this. Error, the creation of a source package matches https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL "Using Revision Control", but how can you pretend that it's version 1? SVN checkout doesn't work by the way. -- 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 445261] Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:00 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: icelandic-fonts Short Description: Font with Icelandic Magical Staves Owners: jstanley Branches: F-8 F-9 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: fonts-sig 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 445261] Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||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 452663] Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452663 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 12:57 EST --- Sure. Done. -- 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 452663] Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452663 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 12:40 EST --- Many thanks. I you don't have anything else to add please set the fedora-review flag to "+" now, so the PASS is official -- 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 445261] Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 12:36 EST --- Please add the copy of the http://www.galdrasyning.is/ permission text in your README (with a "taken from foo URL" header). Next thing you know they'll reorganise their website and your link will point nowhere (If they had made it a txt file we could have just Source-d it directly from this URL) I don't see a 1.001 in the OTF file I download from OFLB, just a 1.000 (will translate in 1.0 for rpm) but I may have a proxy serving an older file between me and upstream. I'd package the font preview in %doc but that's purely optional and we'll certainly need to figure a streamlined way to generate this kind of preview ourselves in all our font packages someday. But that's me being a perfectionist. The legal uncertainty has been cleared, and your package is already better than some I know. You can continue from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a now 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 452663] Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452663
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 12:22 EST ---
MUST Items:
PASS - MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
PASS - MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines .
PASS - MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format
PASS - MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
PASS - MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines .
PASS - MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
PASS - MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) ...
PASS - MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
PASS - MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the reviewer is
unable to read
PASS - MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL.
- did sha1sum; sources matches
NA - MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
NA - MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture,
NA - MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
NA - MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
NA - MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files
NA - MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state
PASS - MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
PASS - MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
PASS - MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be
set with
PASS - MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot}
PASS - MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the
PASS - MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
NA - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
PASS - MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
NA - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
NA - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
NA - MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files
NA - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix
NA - MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require
NA - MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
NA - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
PASS - MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
PASS - MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot}
PASS - MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
- UTF8 + ASCII (sub-set of UTF*)
SHOULD Items:
NA - SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s)
NA - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain
NA - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
- no deps - no mock
PASS - SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
PASS - SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as
described.
- took a look via gnome-font-viewer
PASS - SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
NA - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
NA - SHOULD: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc)
NA - SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin,
Overall:
PASS
--
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 455152] Review Request: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling 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: visual-4.beta26-1.fc9.i386.rpm - Visual Modelling Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 12:09 EST --- 1. You don't need to buildrequires gcc. 2. The Summary doesn't summarize much, and the description isn't very descriptive. For the description, see if there's a paragraph in the README that will work. 3. Your first changelog entry mentions some changes to the source. These should be in a patch file. 4. Source should be specified as a URL to upstream -- 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 445261] Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:52 EST --- New SRPM: http://jstanley.fedorapeople.org/icelandic-fonts-1.001-1.fc9.src.rpm spec is the same Added information about upstream's permission - http://www.galdrasyning.is/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=418&Itemid=46&lang=en -- 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 451189] Review Request: rancid - Really Awesome New Cisco confIg Differ
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: rancid - Really Awesome New Cisco confIg Differ
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451189
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:45 EST ---
Well:
* Versioning
- As the tarball included in the tarball seems pre-version, the versioning
should be: 2.3.2-0.XXX.a8%{?dist} where XXX should be incremented every
time you modify your spec file.
* optflags
- Fedora specific compilation flags are not passed correctly to C compiler.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
You can check what compiler flags are used by
$ rpm --eval %optflags
Also please check the logs printeded out by rpmbuild command.
--
365 Making all in bin
366 gmake[1]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/rancid-2.3.2a8/bin'
367 gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../include -g -O0 -MT hpuifilter.o -MD -MP
-MF .deps/hpuifilter.Tpo -c -o hpuifilter.o hpuifilter
.c
--
* Macros
- Please use macros:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros
For example, etc must be %{_sysconfdir}, /var must be %{_localstatedir}
or so.
* Scriptlet related dependency
- Please add "Requires(pre)" or so according to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups
* Timestamps
- When using "cp" or "install" commands, please add "-p" option to keep
timestamps
on installed files.
* /sbin/ldconfig call
- The rebuilded binary rpm does not contain any libraries under the default
ld search path, so calling /sbin/ldconfig on scriptlets is not needed.
* Invalid directory
- using /var/_local_ is forbidden. Please use %_localstatedir/%name or so.
* Directory ownership issue
- Please make it sure that all directories created when installing a package
are correctly owned by the rpm.
For example, the directories %{_sysconfdir}/rancid/ and %{_datadir}/rancid/
are not owned by any 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 448204] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS - Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
Please 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-Net-DNS - Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server Alias: pear-Net-DNS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448204 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | 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 455153] Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455153 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:28 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: asana-math-fonts Short Description: An OpenType font with a MATH table Owners: jstanley Branches: F-8 F-9 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: fonts-sig 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 448205] Review Request: php-pear-Net-IPv4 - IPv4 network calculations and validation
Please 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-Net-IPv4 - IPv4 network calculations and validation Alias: pear-Net-IPv4 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448205 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | 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 452663] Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: andika-fonts - Andika SIL fonts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452663 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:27 EST --- Will do official 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 455168] Review-Request: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring 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: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring system Alias: mon-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455168 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:29 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > Changing the upstream name is out of question here, I'd say, especially in > case > of a well-established project with generally recognized name. Picking the > package name of first come -- first serve basis is perfectly just here. No, it is not. The name should always be specific. First come first serve is not playing nice with other potential softwares. That being said, this project is the oldest and well established, so the name should certainly be used for that project. But still, contacting upstream about the genericity of the name would seem to be better to me. -- 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 448205] Review Request: php-pear-Net-IPv4 - IPv4 network calculations and validation
Please 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-Net-IPv4 - IPv4 network calculations and
validation
Alias: pear-Net-IPv4
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448205
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:12 EST ---
REVIEW :
* rpmlint :
W: no-documentation
* The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
* source files match upstream:
35ee77683b4fd34d7a9aa77c199b2eda Net_IPv4-1.3.0.tgz
* The spec file name match the base package
* The package must the PHP Packaging Guidelines
* License field in the package spec file match the actual license
* license is open source-compatible (PHP)
* latest version is being packaged.
* The spec file is written in American English
* The spec file is legible
* build in mock (F-9, noarch)
* All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires
* no locales
* no shared library files
* package own all directories that it creates
* Package don't own files or directories already owned by other packages
* no duplicate files
* Permissions on files are set properly
* %clean section
* package consistently use macros
* The package contain code
* no documentation
* no library
* no desktop file
* %install, start with rm -rf %{buildroot}
* All filenames are valid UTF-8
* scriptlets are sane
* Final Provides ok
php-pear(Net_IPv4) = 1.3.0
php-pear-Net-IPv4 = 1.3.0-2.fc9
* Final Requires ok
/usr/bin/pear
php-pear(PEAR)
* install ok
* work ok, with litle test case
Should just change Remy to Remi in the changelog ;)
APPROVED
Please wait for you sponsoring before doing the CVS request.
--
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 455153] Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455153 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:11 EST --- BTW asana-math-fonts.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 15) 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. -- 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 448204] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS - Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
Please 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-Net-DNS - Resolver library used to
communicate with a DNS server
Alias: pear-Net-DNS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448204
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:09 EST ---
Seems to work fine, with simple test case :
string();
echo "\n--- Question :\n";
$res = $dns->search("www.fedoraproject.org");
if ($res) $res->display();
else echo "failed !\n";
?>
--
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 448204] Review Request: php-pear-Net-DNS - Resolver library used to communicate with a DNS server
Please 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-Net-DNS - Resolver library used to
communicate with a DNS server
Alias: pear-Net-DNS
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=448204
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:04 EST ---
REVIEW :
* rpmlint :
W: no-documentation
* The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
* source files match upstream:
1cc082bec28189847083e2c42c2d9b2d Net_DNS-1.0.0.tgz
* The spec file name match the base package
* The package must the PHP Packaging Guidelines
* License field in the package spec file match the actual license (PHP)
* license is open source-compatible.
* latest version is being packaged.
* The spec file is written in American English
* The spec file is legible
* build in mock (F-9, noarch)
* All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires
* no locales
* no shared library files
* package own all directories that it creates
* Package don't own files or directories already owned by other packages
* no duplicate files
* Permissions on files are set properly
* %clean section
* package consistently use macros
* The package contain code
* no documentation
* no library
* no desktop file
* %install, start with rm -rf %{buildroot}
* All filenames are valid UTF-8
* scriptlets are sane
* Final Provides ok
php-pear(Net_DNS) = 1.0.0
php-pear-Net-DNS = 1.0.0-2.fc9.remi
* Final Requires ok
/usr/bin/pear
php-mhash
php-pear(PEAR)
Should just change Remy to Remi in the changelog ;)
APPROVED
Please wait for you sponsoring before doing the CVS request.
--
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 455168] Review-Request: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring 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: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring system Alias: mon-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455168 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:02 EST --- Changing the upstream name is out of question here, I'd say, especially in case of a well-established project with generally recognized name. Picking the package name of first come -- first serve basis is perfectly just here. -- 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 445261] Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 11:04 EST --- This one still needs a little work. 1. don't do an otf cp in %prep, use the more elegant form you did for asana 2. please add a trace of upstream's permission in %doc. Those kinds of things tend to be lost and cause problems later -- 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 455153] Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455153
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:57 EST ---
Minor nitpick:
cp %{SOURCE2} $RPM_BUILD_DIR could be
cp %{SOURCE2} . I think
Otherwise very fine work it's not always easy to get information for upstream.
You can continue from
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Font_package_lifecycle#3.a
now
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 432259] Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432259 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:57 EST --- 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 427411] Review Request: common-lisp-controller - Common Lisp source and compiler manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: common-lisp-controller - Common Lisp source and compiler manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427411 Bug 427411 depends on bug 427391, which changed state. Bug 427391 Summary: Review Request: cl-asdf - Another System Definition Facility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427391 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||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 432259] Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432259 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |.com) | -- 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 427391] Review Request: cl-asdf - Another System Definition Facility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: cl-asdf - Another System Definition Facility https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427391 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||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 427411] Review Request: common-lisp-controller - Common Lisp source and compiler manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: common-lisp-controller - Common Lisp source and compiler manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=427411 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:53 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > Ready for approval, contigent on three things being fixed (listed below): > - remove tabs > - check with legal on licensing (looks more liberal than LGPL so I'm > personally > OK with it) > - include debian/copyright Michael - these were all fixed. I have a ton of Common Lisp packages depending on this approval. I think we're done now, but I think I need you to flip the bit before I request my cvs tree. 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 454960] Review Request: aubio - An audio labelling 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: aubio - An audio labelling library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454960 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:49 EST --- New files: Spec URL: http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/aubio.spec SRPM URL: http://spindazzle.org/Fedora/aubio-0.3.2-2.fc9.src.rpm (In reply to comment #3) > Initial review done, needs some work: > > * License: GPL, GPL is not a valid license tag, it should be "GPLv2+" Fixed. > * Gives the following errors when doing a local build: > RPM build errors: I think this is because you have swig installed. I've BuildRequired swig and created a subpackage for the python bindings. > Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: >/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/__init__.py >/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/__init__.pyc >/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/__init__.pyo >/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/_aubiowrapper.so >/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/aubioclass.py >/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/aubioclass.pyc >/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/aubio/aubioclass.pyo > > > It looks like aubio comes with python bindings, it would probably be best to > add the necessary BR's and put the python stuff in a sub-package. > > * rpmlint says: > aubio.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 31, tab: line 1) > aubio.x86_64: E: zero-length /usr/share/doc/aubio-0.3.2/NEWS > aubio.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath > /usr/lib64/libaubioext.so.2.1.1 > ['/usr/lib64'] > aubio.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/aubiotrack ['/usr/lib64'] > aubio.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/aubioonset ['/usr/lib64'] > aubio.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/aubionotes ['/usr/lib64'] > aubio.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath > /usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/ All fixed. Thanks Hans! AG > You can fix this by putting the following 3 lines between %configure and > make: > # Don't use rpath! > sed -i 's|^hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=.*|hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=""|g' > libtool > sed -i 's|^runpath_var=LD_RUN_PATH|runpath_var=DIE_RPATH_DIE|g' libtool > -- 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 450243] Review Request: google-gadgets - Google Gadgets for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: google-gadgets - Google Gadgets for Linux https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450243 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:18 EST --- For 0.9.3-1: * Version - Well, during the time that this bug was assigned to nobody, the upstream version is changed to 0.10.0... Would you upgrade again? * Timestamps - To keep timestamps on installed files, please consider to use: -- make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT INSTALL="install -p" CPPROG="cp -p" -- Actually this saves most of the files to be installed - 'INSTALL="install -p"' usually works for recent autotools based Makefiles - And 'CPPROG="cp -p"' usually works for Makefiles using "install-sh" for installation. * Dependency - Please check for -devel subpackage. A. For example, libggadget-dbus-1.0.pc contains the line: -- Requires: libggadget-1.0 dbus-1 -- This means -devel subpackage should have "Requires: dbus-devel" B. Another example is that %_includedir/google-gadgets/ggadget/gtk/tooltip.h contains: -- 19 20 #include 21 -- This means that -devel subpackage should have "Requires: gtk2-devel". Then: (In reply to comment #6) > Disabling -qt for now sounds good to me: maybe you can make it a build option > for the future? I feel that enabling qt side does not seem to be bad, however would you tell us your opinion? -- 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 455168] Review-Request: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring 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: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring system Alias: mon-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455168 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:12 EST --- My suggestion would be first to contact upstream and present them the arguments, 'explaining that in fedora we have to consider a broader perspective of a mix of packages of unknown size.' And if it fails then look over the web if there are already existing clashes, if so try to weight which should have precedence and find the name accordingly (it may end up being 'mon'). -- 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 455153] Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: asana-math-fonts - An OpenType font with a MATH table https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455153 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|NEW Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |om) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:04 EST --- What upstream has done here is 200% legal :) Included clarification as README.license in %doc - new SRPM (spec is the same): http://jstanley.fedorapeople.org/asana-math-fonts-0.914-1.fc9.src.rpm - Forwarded Message > From: Young Ryu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Apostolos Syropoulos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, January 5, 2008 2:13:23 AM > Subject: Re: pxfonts and Asana Math > > > I want pxfonts/txfonts to be available in public > for not only document preparation/printing/publication > but also for further modification/revision/improvement. > You can change/copy/re-distribute them. I do not intend > to put any restriction. Your revision and distribution of > the fonts will be absolutely OK. There should be no > legal problem. If GPL causes any problem, I will > drop it and make it completely free for any purpose. > > Young Ryu > > Apostolos Syropoulos wrote: > >Dear Sir, > > > >My name is Apostolos Syropoulos and recently I released my Asana Math > > Open > Type > > font, which is partially a derived work of your pxfonts. I have released the > font > > under the Open Font License > (http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&id=OFL_web), > > but someone told me that there is some legal problem because you had > > released > your > > pxfonts with the GPL (the OFL was written a few months ago!). Could you > > please > let me know if > > there is any problem at all? And if there is how can be fixed? The font is > absolutely free and I > > am making no money from it. > > > > Sincerely yours, > > > >A.S. -- 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 445261] Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: icelandic-fonts - Icelandic Magical Staves https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEEDINFO|NEW Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]| |om) | --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 10:06 EST --- Upstream has authorization to use these images. Can we get this one approved? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445261 No one cared to say that I had got authorization to use the images. Simple misunderstanding here :) -- 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 455071] Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: xfce4-mpc-plugin - MPD client for the Xfce panel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455071 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 09:49 EST --- Yes, it's ISC but not BSD. Can I change that after import or do you want me to do it now? -- 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 432259] Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: speech-dispatcher - Required for speech synthesis on OLPC XO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=432259 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||.com) Bug 432259 depends on bug 433253, which changed state. Bug 433253 Summary: Review Request: dotconf - Required for speech dispatcher on OLPC XO https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433253 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|NEEDINFO Status|NEEDINFO|ASSIGNED Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 09:39 EST --- For F-9/F-8, packages are not pushed to the repositories automatically. Please visit https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ and submit requests to push speech-dispatcher rpms to the repositories, then close this bug as NEXTRELEASE. -- 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 455172] Package Review: perl-Convert-BER - ASN.1 Basic Encoding Rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Package Review: perl-Convert-BER - ASN.1 Basic Encoding Rules Alias: perl-Convert-Ber-r. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455172 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||perl-Convert-Ber-r. Summary|Package Review: perl- |Package Review: perl- |Convert-BER |Convert-BER - ASN.1 Basic ||Encoding Rules -- 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 455168] Review-Request: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring 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: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring system Alias: mon-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455168 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||mon-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 450189] Review Request: guake - Drop-down terminal for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: guake - Drop-down terminal for GNOME https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=450189 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- 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 455174] New: Review Request: perl-Mon - Mon Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455174 Summary: Review Request: perl-Mon - Mon Perl module Product: Fedora Version: 9 Platform: All URL: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/perl-Mon.spec OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] SPEC: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/perl-Mon.spec SRPM: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/mock-results/perl-Mon-0.11-1.el5.noarch/perl-Mon-0.11-1.el5.src.rpm mock: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/mock-results/perl-Mon-0.11-1.el5.noarch/ Description: This is the Perl5 module for interfacing with the Mon system monitoring package. Currently only the client interface is implemented, but more things like special logging routines and persistent monitors are being considered. -- 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 455168] Review-Request: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring 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: mon - General-purpose resource monitoring system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455168 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||455174 -- 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 455172] Package Review: perl-Convert-BER
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Package Review: perl-Convert-BER https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455172 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||455174 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 455172] New: Package Review: perl-Convert-BER
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=455172 Summary: Package Review: perl-Convert-BER Product: Fedora Version: 9 Platform: All URL: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/perl-Convert-BER.spec OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: low Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] SPEC: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/perl-Convert-BER.spec SRPM: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/mock-results/perl-Convert-BER-1.3101-2.el5.noarch/perl-Convert-BER-1.3101-2.el5.src.rpm mock: http://netbsd.sk/~lkundrak/mock-results/perl-Convert-BER-1.3101-2.el5.noarch/ Description: Convert::BER provides an OO interface to encoding and decoding data using the ASN.1 Basic Encoding Rules (BER), a platform independent way of encoding structured binary data together with the structure. -- 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
