[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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 --- Comment #17 from Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 02:25:46 EDT --- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457925] Review Request: biniax - An unique arcade logic game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457925
Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 02:53:23 EDT
---
The package is in good condition. Some notes:
-
The line:
dos2unix Readme.txt LICENSE.txt
is not necassary. You can use sed instead. See:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Common_Rpmlint_Issues#wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding
So you can remove dos2unix from BuildRequires
-
$RPM_OPT_FLAGS is not passed to gcc correctly. Hence the debuginfo package is
not useful.
-
Please be consistent with macros. e.g. in the spec file there is
cp -ra data/* %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/biniax/data
in one line and
%{_datadir}/%{name}
on the other.
-
It would be nice if you can make the desktop file richer. Please see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files
At least, have those fields that are given in that example full.
For instance Name:Biniax (mind the capital letter) would look nicer.
-
Summary: An unique ...
should be
Summary: A unique ...
-
The game does not exit properly. I have to kill the process in order to exit
the game.
Is this because of your patch?
--
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.
___
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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 --- Comment #18 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 02:58:32 EDT --- I will import it now. Thanks for reminder. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460959] Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460959 --- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 03:15:27 EDT --- Doesn't build at my F-9/ppc. + mv /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlbase.so /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlbase.so.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlbase.so.0.0.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlconvenience.so /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlconvenience.so.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlconvenience.so.0.0.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmldom.so /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmldom.so.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmldom.so.0.0.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlengine.so /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlengine.so.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlengine.so.0.0.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlregionator.so /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlregionator.so.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkmlregionator.so.0.0.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libminizip.so /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libminizip.so.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libminizip.so.0.0.0 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/liburiparser.so /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/liburiparser.so.1 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/liburiparser.so.1.0.5 /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkml/ + chrpath --delete /var/tmp/libkml-0.4.0-1.fc9-root-petro/usr/lib/libkml/libkmldom_swig_java.so.0.0.0 open: No such file or directory elf_open: Illegal seek error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.60804 (%install) RPM build errors: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.60804 (%install) [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS] -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460959] Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460959 --- Comment #5 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 04:02:50 EDT --- It wouldn't built for F-9, because dependencies are only available it F-10 or rawhide. Not for F-9 or F-8 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460959] Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460959 --- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 04:14:29 EDT --- because dependencies are only available it F-10 or rawhide. No, all dependencies were satisfied on my F9. Probaply you need to add minimal supported versions to dependencies, e.g. not only BuildRequires: foo, but BuildRequires: foo = 1.2.3.4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460959] Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460959 --- Comment #7 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 04:19:04 EDT --- # requires swig = 1.3.35 yes, i will do that. Swig 1.3.35 is not available for F-9, so I wouldn't be making it available for F-9 anyway. 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452413] Review Request: BkChem - Chemical drawing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452413 --- Comment #7 from Terje Røsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 04:23:59 EDT --- Ok, that's great. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461776] Review Request: kde-plasma-quickaccess - Plasma applet for quick access to the most used folders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461776 Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #1 from Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 04:27:42 EDT --- The package is (almost) perfect. Koji build is good too. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=861703 Here are my notes: - You include a .desktop file in the package. Shouldn't you call some update-database script to let KDE know that you added something? I'm just asking (not requiring). - According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags packages should honor Fedora-specific compiler flags. Make sure that $RPM_OPT_FLAGS is being honored and used. - This is one of my favorite plasma applets. IMHO It should be included in KDE. Thanks for packaging. -- 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. ___ 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 05:17:31 EDT --- php-laconica-0.5.0-3.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-laconica-0.5.0-3.fc9 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 463123] Review Request: gnomint - Graphical x509 Certification Authority management tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463123 --- Comment #7 from Adam Huffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 06:17:43 EDT --- New version at: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/review/gnomint/gnomint-0.5.4-1.fc10.src.rpm http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/review/gnomint/gnomint.spec Includes more fixes and new upstream release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460959] Review Request: libkml - A KML library written in C++ with bindings to other languagues
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460959 --- Comment #8 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 06:27:57 EDT --- http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/libkml-0.4.0-2.fc10.src.rpm http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/libkml.spec 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 250971] Review Request: ivtv-utils - userspace tools for iTVC15/16 and CX23415/16 driven devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=250971 Axel Thimm [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #44 from Axel Thimm [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 06:14:18 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ivtv-utils Short Description: Tools for the iTVC15/16 and CX23415/16 driver Owners: athimm Branches: F-8 F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- 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. ___ 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 Rakesh Pandit [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 326421] Review Request: xmds - the eXtensible Multi-Dimensional Simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=326421 Paul Cochrane [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |il.com) | --- Comment #11 from Paul Cochrane [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 07:13:01 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) ping, it is again a month I will close this if not updated within a week. In that you can you can open a bug again when you are free. I think this is a good idea. Unfortunately, I don't have any more time at present to work on this project, so closing the bug and then reopening it again if I find the time is a good idea. Thanks heaps for your time! Paul -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 463744] Review Request: screenruler - GNOME screen ruler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463744
Debarshi Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Debarshi Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 07:45:12 EDT
---
The issue of %{name} and 'screenruler' being mixed in the Spec is still there,
but I will leave it to your personal taste. :-)
+-+
| This package is APPROVED by me. |
+-+
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2008-October/msg4.html
suggests an alternative way of renaming 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.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461776] Review Request: kde-plasma-quickaccess - Plasma applet for quick access to the most used folders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461776 Milos Jakubicek [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Milos Jakubicek [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 06:57:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) You include a .desktop file in the package. Shouldn't you call some update-database script to let KDE know that you added something? I'm just asking (not requiring). You have to, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465362] Review Request: openconnect -- client for Cisco AnyConnect VPN
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465362 David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: anyconnect |Review Request: openconnect |-- client for Cisco |-- client for Cisco |AnyConnect VPN |AnyConnect VPN -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455953] Review Request: rakarrack - Audio effects processing rack for guitar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455953
--- Comment #4 from David Timms [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 08:05:31 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
The package is pretty good shape. Here are my notes
Thanks for taking the time to review rakarrack !
[?] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
COPYING file says GPLv3 , doc/COPYING file says GPLv2 , {.C} files say GPL
(version 2) explicitly. I would contact the author and ask what the actual
license is. If that's not possible I think GPLv2 will be the best option
(which
is what you have already).
As suggested I have posted a forum query on the developers' source forge site:
https://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=2323002forum_id=778861
In the meantime, I'll assume GPLv2 since that is what is in the source code.
[x] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present.
If you go to the Help- contents or Help-about-license you will get errors.
Those need fixed.
Confirmed, and fixed.
[?] MUST: Dist tag is present and proper.
Afaik the usual way in Fedora is the usage n%{?dist} where n is the release
number. Why did you use 0.n%{?dist} ?
OK. While initially working on the package on my own system, I used the -0.x
pre-release scheme. I will properly fit the fedora scheme with the next update.
[x] MUST: Compiler flags are appropriate.
Fedora specific compilation flags are not honored correctly. As the result
debuginfo rpm is currently not useful. You can check what optflags are used by
$ rpm --eval %optflags
Please see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
How did you work that out ?
The .debuginfo has a reasonable size, installs OK, contains .c/.h files and
what appears to be the debuginfo.
The opt flags are included, but some are added twice for example from a
rpmbuild:
-
if g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.
-O2 -Wall -msse -fno-rtti -pipe -ffunction-sections -fomit-frame-pointer
-Wno-format-y2k -fPIC -fno-exceptions -fno-strict-aliasing
-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -MT FilterParams.o -MD -MP -MF
.deps/FilterParams.Tpo -c -o FilterParams.o FilterParams.C; \
-
rpm --eval %optflags
-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables
Seems the result would be conflicting options for -f{no}exceptions. I don't
know if the the app will work without that option, and had no success in
avoiding the default CFLAGS. Help wanted !
-
Additional comments:
This code
# move icons to the proper freedesktop location
%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps
%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps
%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps
%{__mv} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/icono_rakarrack_32x32.png \
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/32x32/apps/rakarrack.32x32.png
%{__mv} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/icono_rakarrack_64x64.png \
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps/rakarrack.64x64.png
%{__mv} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/icono_rakarrack_128x128.png \
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/128x128/apps/rakarrack.128x128.png
will be cleaner if its written as
for dim in 32x32 64x64 128x128; do
%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/$dim/apps
%{__mv} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/icono_rakarrack_$dim.png \
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/$dim/apps/rakarrack.$dim.png
done
OK, I can see that saves a few lines, and it will limit the amount of rework
that might be required if paths needed to be changed etc. Done.
-
What is the %exclude for?
%exclude %{_datadir}/applications/rakarrack.desktop
%{_datadir}/applications/*desktop
Can't you just use
%{_datadir}/applications/*desktop
or
%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
The source includes a .desktop file, that make install puts in the normal
location. The spec generates another with the fedora required bits added, and
prepended with fedora-*. I found that without the %{exclude} I end up with two
Rakarrack items in the menu.
I had tried to remove items from the included .desktop, but didn't seem to be
able to do this with desktop-file-install:
included: rakarrack-0.2.0/data/rakarrack.desktop
-
[Desktop Entry]
Type=Application
Categories=AudioVideo;Audio;
Exec=rakarrack
Name=Rakarrack
[Bug 465362] Review Request: anyconnect -- client for Cisco AnyConnect VPN
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465362 --- Comment #1 from David Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 07:04:23 EDT --- Spec URL: http://david.woodhou.se/openconnect.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.infradead.org/pub/openconnect-f9/openconnect-0.92-1.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. ___ 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455211 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 05:18:32 EDT --- php-laconica-0.5.0-3.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-laconica-0.5.0-3.fc8 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455953] Review Request: rakarrack - Audio effects processing rack for guitar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455953 --- Comment #5 from David Timms [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 08:20:18 EDT --- ps: Is this a pre-review ? I can't seem to find your user name in FAS. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 326421] Review Request: xmds - the eXtensible Multi-Dimensional Simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=326421 Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449 Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #12 from Rakesh Pandit [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 08:29:48 EDT --- Okay, feel free to reopen it as a new review request when you are ready. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 463266] Review Request: globalplatform - Access OpenPlatform and GlobalPlatform smart cards library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463266 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457108] Review Request: libss7 - SS7 protocol services to applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457108 Jeffrey C. Ollie [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||465661 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461338] Review Request: dahdi - Userspace tools to configure the DAHDI kernel modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461338 Jeffrey C. Ollie [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||465661 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 463266] Review Request: globalplatform - Access OpenPlatform and GlobalPlatform smart cards library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463266
--- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 09:16:24 EDT
---
Created an attachment (id=319494)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=319494)
Patch to provide globalplatform.pc
(In reply to comment #3)
I've addressed all issues (see changelog in spec and spec itself) except the
pkg-config one as I'm not quite sure how to proceed with this.
I was digging through the configure output and checking the config.log file to
see what is going on there. The globalplatform configure script seems to use
pkg-config to detect the location of pcsc-libs:
Yes, and it is not what I mentioned before. What I said is that it is better
that you create globalplatform.pc(.in) and install it under %_libdir/pkgconfig
so that other applications using globalplatform-devel package will find
the needed CFLAGS easily. How do you think?
Note: When applying this patch, your spec file should be fixed like:
---
Name: globalplatform
Version: 5.0.0
..
BuildRequires: openssl-devel = 0.9.7e
BuildRequires: zlib-devel = 1.2.3
BuildRequires: pcsc-lite-devel
BuildRequires: automake
BuildRequires: libtool
..
%prep
%setup -q
%patch0 -p1 -b .add
aclocal
autoconf
automake
touch -r Makefile.in configure aclocal.m4
%build
%files devel
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%{_libdir}/*.so
%{_includedir}/GlobalPlatform/
%{_libdir}/pkgconfig/*.pc
-
--
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.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 463266] Review Request: globalplatform - Access OpenPlatform and GlobalPlatform smart cards library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=463266 --- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 09:18:53 EDT --- By the way: - NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a pre-review of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on: http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html (NOTE: please don't choose Merge Review) Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464430] Review Request: ltsp-server-livesetupdocs - Doc describing how to enable LTSP on Fedora Live LTSP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464430 --- Comment #2 from Warren Togami [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 11:10:34 EDT --- I'm willing to sponsor Peter after the package 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465382] Review Request: bouncycastle-mail - Additional libraries for Bouncy Castle
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465382
Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 11:23:14 EDT
---
For 1.41-1
* Summary/Description
- Would you change Summary/Description more informative?
I don't think the Summary Additional libraries makes
much sense.
* Naming
- First of all, why is this srpm named as bouncycastle-mail,
not bcmail?
* License
- License tag should be MIT
* SourceURL
- SOURCE0 must be written with full URL:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
* (Build)Requires
- I guess BuildRequires: java-devel = 1.7 is better than
java-1.7.0-icedtea-devel.
* unpackaging source / removing precompiled binaries
- Please unpack all sources in the tarball before removing
precompiled binaries to make it sure that all precompiled
binaries (including those in zip files if any) are
correctly removed.
! By the way when using unzip adding -qq option is
preferred. When using zip source tarball %setup -q
uses this.
* absolute symlink
-
W: symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/java/gcj-endorsed/bcmail-1.41.jar
/usr/share/java/bcmail-1.41.jar
-
- Mainly for chroot reason and so on, Fedora requests that all
symlinks should be relative, not absolute.
! %postun
-
%postun
if [ $1 -eq 0 ] ; then
if [ -x %{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db ]; then
%{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db
fi
fi
-
- While I am not familiar with gcj, would you explain why
it is sufficient that these scripts are called only when
[ $1 -eq 0 ] ? (please also refer to:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines )
* %attr
- Although GCJGuidelines uses it, the part %attr(-,root,root)
is completely redundant.
--
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.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459916] Review Request: freedink-dfarc - Frontend and .dmod installer for GNU FreeDink
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459916 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 12:03:16 EDT --- freedink-dfarc-3.2.1-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freedink-dfarc-3.2.1-2.fc9 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459916] Review Request: freedink-dfarc - Frontend and .dmod installer for GNU FreeDink
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459916 --- Comment #27 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 12:23:00 EDT --- freedink-dfarc-3.2.1-2.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freedink-dfarc-3.2.1-2.fc8 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459908] Review Request: freedink - Adventure and role-playing game (engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459908 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 12:39:52 EDT --- freedink-1.08.20080920-4.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freedink-1.08.20080920-4.fc9 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459908] Review Request: freedink - Adventure and role-playing game (engine)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459908 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 12:55:12 EDT --- freedink-1.08.20080920-4.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freedink-1.08.20080920-4.fc8 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 431250] Review Request: librep - An embeddable LISP environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431250 --- Comment #32 from ritz [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 13:03:09 EDT --- The file /usr/bin/rep-config will conflict in multilib settings, is multilib support really required ? As i see this to be of little value - comment#11 . In librep.pc there is no Libs: entry??? As of now, i am thinking of excluding this from package. Will talk to upstream about this using this as a wrapper around pkgconfig. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459915] Review Request: freedink-data - Adventure and role-playing game (data)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459915 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 13:26:19 EDT --- freedink-data-1.08.20080920-3.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freedink-data-1.08.20080920-3.fc8 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459915] Review Request: freedink-data - Adventure and role-playing game (data)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459915 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 13:26:13 EDT --- freedink-data-1.08.20080920-3.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freedink-data-1.08.20080920-3.fc9 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465690] New: Review Request: perl-DBD-Multi - DB Proxy with failover and load balancing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-Multi - DB Proxy with failover and load balancing Alias: perl-DBD-Multi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465690 Summary: Review Request: perl-DBD-Multi - DB Proxy with failover and load balancing Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/DBD-Multi OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SRPM URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-DBD-Multi-0.14-1.fc9.src.rpm SPEC URL: http://fedora.biggerontheinside.net/review/perl-DBD-Multi.spec Description: This software manages multiple database connections for failovers and also simple load balancing. It acts as a proxy between your code and your database connections, transparently choosing a connection for each query, based on your preferences and present availability of the DB server. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465690] Review Request: perl-DBD-Multi - DB Proxy with failover and load balancing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465690 --- Comment #1 from Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 13:32:21 EDT --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=862415 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465690] Review Request: perl-DBD-Multi - DB Proxy with failover and load balancing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465690 Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||465692 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461776] Review Request: kde-plasma-quickaccess - Plasma applet for quick access to the most used folders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461776 --- Comment #3 from Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 13:38:36 EDT --- Dear Milos, I was aware of that page and actually it's that page which got me confused. This is not a regular desktop file. It is a KDE4 desktop file. I'm not sure if it should be treated differently or not. For instance, the spec file of the approved kde-plasma-lancelot package doesn't have such a call. Well, maybe you are right. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465694] New: Review Request: drascula - Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drascula - Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465694 Summary: Review Request: drascula - Drascula: The Vampire Strikes Back 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/drascula.spec SRPM URL: http://lucilanga.fedorapeople.org/drascula-1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: You play the role of John Hacker, a British estate agent, who travels to a small village of Transylvania in order to negotiate the sale of some ground of Gibraltar with the Count Drascula. But unfortunately Hacker is not aware of who is Drascula in reality: the most terrible vampire with just one idea on his mind: DOMINATING the World demonstrating that he is even more evil than his brother Vlad. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 437192] Review Request: simdock - Fast and customizable dockbar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=437192 --- Comment #5 from Terje Røsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 14:13:34 EDT --- Seems like I forgot to update the spec file, fixed 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226813] Merge Review: zsh
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226813 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 --- Comment #14 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 14:23:18 EDT --- So it does. ;( James: Can this be removed? Adding the legal blocker to see if this is really needing to be fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461139] Review Request: Thabit-fonts -Thabit-fonts from Arabeyes.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461139 --- Comment #14 from Subhodip Biswas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 14:27:03 EDT --- ok ..will fix them soon -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459455] Review Request: fmit - Free Music Instrument Tuner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459455 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 14:37:09 EDT --- Thanks for the comment Ralf. The package from comment #11 looks good to me, I don't see any further blockers, so this package is APPROVED. I'll go ahead and sponsor you jebba. Continue the process from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_a_Fedora_Account Just let me know what your fedora account is so I can sponsor you. Please let me know if you have any questions or issues either here, in email or on irc. 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459979] Review Request: mlt - Toolkit for broadcasters, video editors, media players, transcoders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459979 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 14:38:33 EDT --- Removing NEEDSPONSOR, as I am sponsoring submitter. Jebba: The ping in comment #6 was asking if you had a chance to address the issues mentioned in comment #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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 447533] Review Request: minirpc - an RPC library for stream oriented transports
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447533 Adam Goode [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Adam Goode [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 14:51:14 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: minirpc New Branches: EL-5 Owners: agoode -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461131] Review Request: sim - Simple Instant Messenger
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461131 --- Comment #43 from Pavel Alexeev [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 15:21:30 EDT --- Patrice Dumas thanks for the link. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459455] Review Request: fmit - Free Music Instrument Tuner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459455 --- Comment #13 from jebba [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 15:34:04 EDT --- My fedora account is jebba too (as in here and irc). I already have a fedora account and am cla_done. Just now I applied here (Fedora Packager CVS Commit Group): https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/group/list?search=packager* Thanks kevin! -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461776] Review Request: kde-plasma-quickaccess - Plasma applet for quick access to the most used folders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461776 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 15:46:06 EDT --- update-database is required only if the .desktop file includes the MimeType= key (which I don't think is the case 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 431250] Review Request: librep - An embeddable LISP environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431250 --- Comment #33 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 15:47:43 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) The file /usr/bin/rep-config will conflict in multilib settings, is multilib support really required ? As i see this to be of little value - comment#11 . One may want to link against a specific arch. But even though this is not a very usefull setting, one should not have get error when installing both, and currently this is the case, since there is a conflict. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460838] Review Request: printoxx - Print image files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460838 --- Comment #6 from Nicoleau Fabien [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 16:15:38 EDT --- Update for 1.6 : Spec URL: http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/SPECS/printoxx.spec SRPM URL: http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/srpms.fc9/printoxx-1.6-1.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461776] Review Request: kde-plasma-quickaccess - Plasma applet for quick access to the most used folders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461776 --- Comment #5 from Milos Jakubicek [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 16:34:18 EDT --- I'm not sure whether we're speaking about the same thing now: I didn't say anything about update-desktop-database. The question was about some update-database script a my answer concerns the usage of desktop-file-install, where the current guidelines state: It is not simply enough to just include the .desktop file in the package, one MUST run desktop-file-install OR desktop-file-validate in %install (and have BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils), to help ensure .desktop file safety and spec-compliance. If this is not necessary anymore generally (what I doubt strongly) or not necessary in this particular case (if so, please explain to me why -- thanks), then its a topic for FPC to change the guidelines accordingly. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461139] Review Request: Thabit-fonts -Thabit-fonts from Arabeyes.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461139 Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #15 from Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 16:33:54 EDT --- lowercase(In reply to comment #9) Nicolas, I feel like this would be a good candidate for naming arabeyes-Thabit-fonts. lowercase please Appart from that, I really need to find a few hours to review the font packages backlog :( -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459979] Review Request: mlt - Toolkit for broadcasters, video editors, media players, transcoders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459979
--- Comment #9 from jebba [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 16:41:27 EDT ---
I was just buying time. :)
0.3.0-3
http://www.blagblagblag.org/pub/BLAG/developers/jebba/jebbadora/mlt.spec
http://www.blagblagblag.org/pub/BLAG/developers/jebba/jebbadora/mlt-0.3.0-3.fc9.src.rpm
Fixed:
- License: GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+
- Group: Development/Tools
- ExcludeArch: x86_64 s390 s390x ppc ppc64
- %%defattr(-,root,root)
- %%doc docs/
- %%{_libdir}/%%{name} to main package
Punted:
* mlt-devel.i386: W: executable-stack /usr/lib/mlt/libmltgtk2.so
* compilation flags, debug info
I'll be able to fix the compilation flags/debug, but I don't know about the
executable-stack.
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.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465710] New: Review Request: perl-qooxdoo-compat - Perl backend for Qooxdoo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-qooxdoo-compat - Perl backend for Qooxdoo https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465710 Summary: Review Request: perl-qooxdoo-compat - Perl backend for Qooxdoo 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora spec: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/perl-qooxdoo-compat/perl-qooxdoo-compat.spec srpm: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/perl-qooxdoo-compat/perl-qooxdoo-compat-0.7.3-1.fc9.src.rpm description: This package provides the Perl backend for Qooxdoo, a comprehensive and innovative Ajax application framework. This package supports Qooxdoo 0.7. koji: N/A, koji seems to be down. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465710] Review Request: perl-qooxdoo-compat - Perl backend for Qooxdoo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465710 Terje Røsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||441378 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 441378] Review Request: smokeping - Latency Logging and Graphing System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441378 Terje Røsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||465710 --- Comment #25 from Terje Røsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 16:54:11 EDT --- Updated package: - move Qooxdoo::JSONRPC to separate package, see #465710 spec: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/smokeping/smokeping.spec srpm: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/smokeping/smokeping-2.4.2-5.fc9.src.rpm koji: N/A, koji seems to be down. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465690] Review Request: perl-DBD-Multi - DB Proxy with failover and load balancing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465690 --- Comment #2 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 17:19:20 EDT --- I wonder if (quoting from http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=862416name=build.log ) is normal: t/pod-coverage. skipped: Pod not available for individual methods in DBD::Multi, use DBI instead. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461776] Review Request: kde-plasma-quickaccess - Plasma applet for quick access to the most used folders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461776 --- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 18:06:10 EDT --- I was only responding to comment #2, ie, to let system know Yes, desktop-file-install usage *is* required, and is a separate issue (used for .desktop file validation purposes primarily). -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455953] Review Request: rakarrack - Audio effects processing rack for guitar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455953
Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #6 from Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 21:18:39 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #4)
(In reply to comment #3)
The package is pretty good shape. Here are my notes
Thanks for taking the time to review rakarrack !
[?] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
COPYING file says GPLv3 , doc/COPYING file says GPLv2 , {.C} files say GPL
(version 2) explicitly. I would contact the author and ask what the actual
license is. If that's not possible I think GPLv2 will be the best option
(which
is what you have already).
As suggested I have posted a forum query on the developers' source forge site:
https://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=2323002forum_id=778861
In the meantime, I'll assume GPLv2 since that is what is in the source code.
Thanks!
-
[?] MUST: Dist tag is present and proper.
Afaik the usual way in Fedora is the usage n%{?dist} where n is the release
number. Why did you use 0.n%{?dist} ?
OK. While initially working on the package on my own system, I used the -0.x
pre-release scheme. I will properly fit the fedora scheme with the next
update.
That's fine, as long as you turn to the standard at the end of the day.
-
[x] MUST: Compiler flags are appropriate.
Fedora specific compilation flags are not honored correctly. As the result
debuginfo rpm is currently not useful. You can check what optflags are used
by
$ rpm --eval %optflags
Please see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags
How did you work that out ?
The .debuginfo has a reasonable size, installs OK, contains .c/.h files and
what appears to be the debuginfo.
The opt flags are included, but some are added twice for example from a
rpmbuild:
-
if g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I. -I.
-O2 -Wall -msse -fno-rtti -pipe -ffunction-sections -fomit-frame-pointer
-Wno-format-y2k -fPIC -fno-exceptions -fno-strict-aliasing
-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables -MT FilterParams.o -MD -MP -MF
.deps/FilterParams.Tpo -c -o FilterParams.o FilterParams.C; \
-
rpm --eval %optflags
-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector
--param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i386 -mtune=generic
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables
Seems the result would be conflicting options for -f{no}exceptions. I don't
know if the the app will work without that option, and had no success in
avoiding the default CFLAGS. Help wanted !
Uh oh, sorry my bad. I missed that the %configure macro takes care of the
CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS. About -f{no}exceptions : If two opposite flags are passed,
the latter is picked up. So you are fine in this case. You can keep it the way
you had in the 0.1 spec file.
In the future make sure that nothing overrides the opt flags. (Always the last
ones are picked up!)
-
will be cleaner if its written as
for dim in 32x32 64x64 128x128; do
%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/$dim/apps
%{__mv} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/icono_rakarrack_$dim.png \
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/$dim/apps/rakarrack.$dim.png
done
OK, I can see that saves a few lines, and it will limit the amount of rework
that might be required if paths needed to be changed etc. Done.
Thanks! But I need to correct myself here.
%{__mkdir} -p %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/$dim/apps
%{__mv} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/pixmaps/icono_rakarrack_$dim.png \
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/$dim/apps/rakarrack.png
would be better. None of the existing icons I saw in hicolors/$dim/apps/ are
named as application.$dim.png . They are all named as application.png . Let's
keep the thing as they are.
-
What is the %exclude for?
%exclude %{_datadir}/applications/rakarrack.desktop
%{_datadir}/applications/*desktop
Can't you just use
%{_datadir}/applications/*desktop
or
%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop
The source includes a .desktop file, that make install puts in the normal
location. The spec generates another with the fedora required bits added, and
prepended with fedora-*. I found that without the
[Bug 459540] Review Request: mediawiki-imagemap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459540 --- Comment #15 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 21:36:26 EDT --- cvs updated packages build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?userID=724 Now I'm supposed to push them through bodhi? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460289] Review Request: vldocking
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460289 Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Comment #14 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 22:07:54 EDT --- cvs updated packages build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/builds?userID=724 Now I'm supposed to push them through bodhi? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428793] Review Request: xhtml2fo-style-xsl - Antenna House, Inc. XHTML to XSL:FO stylesheets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428793 --- Comment #13 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 22:10:01 EDT --- cvs updated, but I generated a problem. I added an extra and wrong tag xhtml2fo-style-xsl-20051222-1 and koji gets mad trying to compile. I've tried to remove the tag without success. I'm sorry. for the other packages I've followed the precise process and things worked fine. It's my fault :-/ -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460287] Review Request: htmlparser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460287 Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 22:23:18 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: htmlparser Short Description: HTML Parser, a Java library used to parse HTML Owners: olea Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: mtasaka -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428798] Review Request: OmegaT - Computer Aid Translation tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428798 Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #31 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 22:23:32 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: OmegaT Short Description: Computer Aid Translation tool Owners: olea Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: mtasaka -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459455] Review Request: fmit - Free Music Instrument Tuner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459455 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #14 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 22:35:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) Removed Requires: per #10, at version fmit-0.97.7-3.fc9 Well, * I am not sure why this srpm has BuildRequires qt-devel (this is qt4) and qt3-designer (this is qt3) * Fedora specific compilation flags are not honored: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=862771 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Compiler_flags * When using cp or install commands, add -p option to keep timestamps on installed files: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465382] Review Request: bouncycastle-mail - Additional libraries for Bouncy Castle
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465382
--- Comment #2 from Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 23:27:12 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #1)
Dear mtasaka,
Thanks for the review. I stole the spec file directly from the fedora
bouncycastle package and did not modify much except the %{name}'s. I knew it
lacks certain things. All of the errors/flaws of my spec is inherited from the
original spec file.
For 1.41-1
* Summary/Description
- Would you change Summary/Description more informative?
I don't think the Summary Additional libraries makes
much sense.
I added to Summary/Description. I think it's better now.
* Naming
- First of all, why is this srpm named as bouncycastle-mail,
not bcmail?
Let me tell you the situation. The actual Bouncy Castle is a suite consisting
of many libraries. bcprov* and bcmail are two of these libraries among many
others. In Fedora, the bcprov library is already packed as
bouncycastle.version.rpm but not bcprov.version.rpm.
Originally, I was going back and forth between the names: bcmail and
bouncycastle-mail . I decided on the latter for the sake of staying consistent
with the existing bouncycastle package. But I am fine with renaming the
package.
Let me know what you think.
* License
- License tag should be MIT
I know. See comment #4 of
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465203
Fixed now.
* SourceURL
- SOURCE0 must be written with full URL:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
Done
* (Build)Requires
- I guess BuildRequires: java-devel = 1.7 is better than
java-1.7.0-icedtea-devel.
Done
* unpackaging source / removing precompiled binaries
- Please unpack all sources in the tarball before removing
precompiled binaries to make it sure that all precompiled
binaries (including those in zip files if any) are
correctly removed.
! By the way when using unzip adding -qq option is
preferred. When using zip source tarball %setup -q
uses this.
Fixed
* absolute symlink
-
W: symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/java/gcj-endorsed/bcmail-1.41.jar
/usr/share/java/bcmail-1.41.jar
-
- Mainly for chroot reason and so on, Fedora requests that all
symlinks should be relative, not absolute.
Fixed
! %postun
-
%postun
if [ $1 -eq 0 ] ; then
if [ -x %{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db ]; then
%{_bindir}/rebuild-gcj-db
fi
fi
-
- While I am not familiar with gcj, would you explain why
it is sufficient that these scripts are called only when
[ $1 -eq 0 ] ? (please also refer to:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines )
* %attr
- Although GCJGuidelines uses it, the part %attr(-,root,root)
is completely redundant.
My best answer will be: That's the way it is in the original bouncycastle.spec
file. Maybe it remained from pre-F-8 days where no JDK was available. Now I
took that part off and redesigned the parts regarding GCJ honoring the
guidelines (except %attr).
I added the if-clauses %if %{with_gcj} as the guidelines propose but this
results in the rpmlint warning:
bouncycastle-mail.spec:98: W: libdir-macro-in-noarch-package
%{_libdir}/gcj/%{name}
which is a wrong warning because noarch does not apply to that line (is this an
rpmlint bug?). Should I take those %if %{with_gcj} off from the spec file?**
I packaged bcmail because it is a requirement for iText (bug #465511)
which will let me enable the pdf plugin of tuxguitar in the future. I don't
know much about the cryptography otherwise.
New files:
SPEC: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/bouncycastle-mail.spec
SRPM: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/bouncycastle-mail-1.41-2.fc10.src.rpm
Thanks again!
*bcprov is the main library. The other libraries depend on it and they don't
mean anything without it.
** You can build the package with rpmbuild -ba --without gcj
bouncycastle-mail.spec now and this will produce a noarch rpm, without those
arch dependent .so files produced by gcj.
--
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.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457947] Review Request: oldstandard-fonts - Old Standard Fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457947 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 23:45:17 EDT --- The spec file and package name differ. Shouldn't the package be named 69oldstandard as you also originally submitted? rpmlint says: 69oldstandard-fonts.src: E: description-line-too-long Old Standard is an attempt to provide a high quality font, suitable for classical, biblical and medieval studies as well as for general-purpose typesetting in languages which use Greek or Cyrillic script, 69oldstandard-fonts.src: E: no-changelogname-tag 69oldstandard-fonts.src: W: non-coherent-filename oldstandard-fonts-1-1.fc9.src.rpm 69oldstandard-fonts-1-1.fc9.src.rpm error checking signature of oldstandard-fonts-1-1.fc9.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings. Do you really need these: match target=pattern test name=family stringsans-serif/string /test test name=lang compare=contains stringjp/string /test edit name=lang mode=prepend binding=strong stringen/string /edit /match alias familysans-serif/family prefer familyDejaVu Sans/family /prefer /alias in the fontconfig file? The srpm file also seems to be corrupted I am afraid: 69oldstandard-fonts-1-1.fc9 warning: user Package does not exist - using root warning: group Package does not exist - using root warning: user Package does not exist - using root warning: group Package does not exist - using root warning: user Ankur does not exist - using root warning: group Ankur does not exist - using root error: unpacking of archive failed on file /home/package-review/oldstandard-fonts/oldstand-1.0.ttf.zip;48e9897c: cpio: read -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457947] Review Request: oldstandard-fonts - Old Standard Fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457947 --- Comment #3 from Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 23:49:58 EDT --- rpmlint on binary package: 69oldstandard-fonts.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/69oldstandard-fonts-1/OFL-FAQ.txt 69oldstandard-fonts.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/69oldstandard-fonts-1/OFL.txt 69oldstandard-fonts.noarch: E: description-line-too-long Old Standard is an attempt to provide a high quality font, suitable for classical, biblical and medieval studies as well as for general-purpose typesetting in languages which use Greek or Cyrillic script, 69oldstandard-fonts.noarch: E: no-changelogname-tag 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 2 warnings. (In reply to comment #2) The spec file and package name differ. Shouldn't the package be named 69oldstandard as you also originally submitted? Rather I guess you intended to rename it to oldstandard-fonts. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461776] Review Request: kde-plasma-quickaccess - Plasma applet for quick access to the most used folders
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461776 --- Comment #7 from Orcan Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-05 23:54:39 EDT --- OK then. What he needs is just a desktop-file-install call and that's it, as far as the .desktop file is concerned. I hope we all got over with the confusion 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465727] Review Request: obexd - D-Bus service for Obex Client access
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465727 --- Comment #1 from Bastien Nocera [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:26:23 EDT --- Builds in koji scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=862931 -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459540] Review Request: mediawiki-imagemap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459540 --- Comment #16 from Peter Lemenkov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:24:33 EDT --- Exactly. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465727] New: Review Request: obexd - D-Bus service for Obex Client access
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: obexd - D-Bus service for Obex Client access https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465727 Summary: Review Request: obexd - D-Bus service for Obex Client access 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://hadess.fedorapeople.org/obexd/obexd.spec SRPM URL: http://hadess.fedorapeople.org/obexd/obexd-0.5-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: obexd contains obex-client, a D-Bus service to allow sending files using the Obex Push protocol, common on mobile phones and other Bluetooth-equipped devices. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465690] Review Request: perl-DBD-Multi - DB Proxy with failover and load balancing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465690 --- Comment #3 from Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:31:24 EDT --- That is a rather weird test to have in there, as the author has everything skipped: plan skip_all = 'Pod not available for individual methods in DBD::Multi, use DBI instead.'; So, I'm not sure it's normal, but it's certainly expected in this instance :) -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461575] Review Request: openvas-libraries - Support libraries for Open Vulnerability Assessment (OpenVAS) Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461575 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||om) --- Comment #3 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:52:08 EDT --- can you post updated SRPM? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457690] Review Request: python-flickrapi - python module for flickr api
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457690 --- Comment #13 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:56:58 EDT --- look like no interest from reporter to build this package. Will Close this as NOTABUG this weekend. -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461575] Review Request: openvas-libraries - Support libraries for Open Vulnerability Assessment (OpenVAS) Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461575 Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |om) | --- Comment #4 from Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:58:53 EDT --- yep. sorry i had to reinstall my laptop, will do that today :) -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461757] Review Request: libdwarf - library for producing and consuming DWARF debugging information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461757 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||) --- Comment #15 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:57:49 EDT --- Can you request for CVS and build this package and Close this 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 439163] Review Request: perl-HTML-Prototype - Generate HTML and Javascript for the Prototype library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=439163 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Comment #9 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 00:59:29 EDT --- Closing as NOTABUG 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465727] Review Request: obexd - D-Bus service for Obex Client access
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465727 Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 01:09:41 EDT --- how is this different from bluetooth-sendto? -- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458698] Review Request: libgdbus - D-Bus helper library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458698 --- Comment #7 from Parag AN(पराग) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-06 01:15:01 EDT --- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
