[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 #11 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12
02:17:21 EDT ---
Thanks. Still there are some issues
*: needs fixed .
?: doesn't need fixed but my preference is different than yours. Take it or
don't.
* rakarrack.desktop - %{name}.desktop
? %{name} is a basic rack of effects for guitar... - Rakarrack is a basic rack
of effects for guitar...
because this is a Description. Unless the application's name is strictly
beginning with a non-capital letter, I would refer to it capital-lettered in
sections like Summary or Description.
* This line needs to be in the %prep section:
%configure --docdir=%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
--htmldir=%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
* These lines need to be in the %prep section too:
%{__sed} -i 's/Icon=icono_rakarrack_128x128/Icon=rakarrack/'
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/rakarrack.desktop
%{__sed} -i 's/Guitar Effects Processor/Real-time audio effects processing
rack for guitar/' %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/rakarrack.desktop
echo GenericName=Digital audio effects processor
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/rakarrack.desktop
echo Version=1.0 %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/rakarrack.desktop
You may need to change the %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/ to data/
Basically, the %build section is for building/compiling, %install section is to
install the software into %{buildroot}. Everything else that can be done before
coming to these sections must be done in %prep.
* %doc AUTHORS README
%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/COPYING
%{_datadir}/doc/%{name}/html
This has problems. Now there are two document directories created:
/usr/share/doc/rakarrack /usr/share/doc/rakarrack-0.2.0
You only need one document directory. COPYING and html needs to go into %doc
(which is /usr/share/doc/rakarrack-0.2.0).
What you have to do is to make the program point onto the correct document
directory when you click on the Help-contents button. You may need to hack the
code (with some patch) to achieve this or most likely (and hopefully) it will
be enough just to pass certain parameters to the configure script. Look at the
output of ./configure --help to see what parameters you may use.
--
So you decided to not add a new category? I'd say that would be convenient for
people dealing with audio software. :)
--
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 #12 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12
02:23:45 EDT ---
Actually, the last thing in the previous message that I wrote was:
* This line needs to be in the %prep section:
%configure --docdir=%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
--htmldir=%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
These may be the right parameters to pass to the configure script. You may need
to check it out.
Sorry I forgot to edit my last paragraph accordingly.
(Still %configure needs to go into %prep.)
--
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 #13 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12
02:56:04 EDT ---
OK, this is probably what you need to do (regarding the docs)
...
%prep
...
sed -i
's|HELPDIR=$prefix/share/doc/${PACKAGE}|HELPDIR=$prefix/share/doc/${PACKAGE}-%{version}|'
configure
%configure --docdir=%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
--htmldir=%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
...
%files
%doc AUTHORS README html COPYING
...
It should be something like this.
--
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 Warren Togami [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Warren Togami [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 02:59:59 EDT --- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines I took a look at the spec file. Did you even read the Fedora packaging guidelines? A few suggestions: * Start from scratch using a .spec template from /etc/rpmdevtools/spectemplate*.spec from the rpmdevtools package. * The source tarball, include a version number within the tarball name. Generally like name-version.tar.bz2. * Do not include a Packager tag. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros Replace path names like /etc and /usr/share with macros from this page. You should also want to run rpmlint on both the .src.rpm and .noarch.rpm. Correct everything that it complains about. [EMAIL PROTECTED] tmp]$ rpmlint ltsp-server-livesetupdocs-0.1-0.src.rpm ltsp-server-livesetupdocs.src:10: W: hardcoded-packager-tag [EMAIL PROTECTED] ltsp-server-livesetupdocs.src: W: no-%build-section ltsp-server-livesetupdocs.src: E: no-changelogname-tag ltsp-server-livesetupdocs.src: W: invalid-license GPL ltsp-server-livesetupdocs.src: W: no-url-tag 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. Assigning package review 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426867] Review Request: scala - Hybrid functional/object-oriented language
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=426867 --- Comment #75 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:03:51 EDT --- ping again?? -- 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 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- Comment #34 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:05:49 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 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449869 --- Comment #21 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:07:57 EDT --- ping again?? -- 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 438543] Review Request: Synopsis - Source-code introspection 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=438543 --- Comment #50 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:06:52 EDT --- I will close this bug again if no response is received from the reporter within ONE WEEk. -- 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 453519] Review Request: UnihanDb - The Unihan character database in 5NF
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=453519 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #20 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:10:33 EDT --- Now closing, 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 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 --- Comment #16 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:13:26 EDT --- Please submit requests on bodhi to push packages to repositories: 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 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
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=461077 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:15:18 EDT --- ping again? -- 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 466241] Review Request: starlab - A Software Environment for Collisional Stellar Dynamics
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=466241 Lubomir Rintel [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:21:03 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: starlab Short Description: A Software Environment for Collisional Stellar Dynamics Owners: lkundrak Branches: EL-5 F-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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 446800] Review Request: ebnetd - EBNET protocol 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=446800 --- Comment #7 from Akira TAGOH [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 03:49:13 EDT --- Thanks. updated. Spec URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd.spec SRPM URL: http://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/ebnetd/ebnetd-1.0-4.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 465372] Review Request: chntpw - Change passwords in Windows SAM 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=465372 Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 05:32:51 EDT --- * rpmlint is silent * follow guidelines * free software, license included * match upstream: 09addfe7ae469677da39ed66d83858d3 chntpw-source-080526.zip * %files section right Just one suggestion, I think it is better to use sed for the end of line, and to keep timestamp, like: sed -e 's/\r$//' WinReg.txt WinReg.txt.eol touch -c -r WinReg.txt WinReg.txt.eol mv WinReg.txt.eol WinReg.txt This is only asuggestion, so 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 466658] Review Request: VisualBoyAdvance - Nintendo Gameboy (,Advance,Color) Emulator
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=466658 --- Comment #1 from Conrad Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 06:56:18 EDT --- Oops, doesn't build in koji [0], but rpmlint is silent. The configure script doesn't recognize ppc64-redhat? [0]: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=875185 -- 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 442270] Review Request: lxde-common - Default configuration files for LXDE
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=442270 --- Comment #26 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 05:23:57 EDT --- (In reply to comment #22) (In reply to comment #21) (In reply to comment #20) * double clicking on th etrash gives 'command not found' What trash? There is no trash on the LX desktop. There is one on mine :-). Though I don't know where it comes from. Me ether, it's definitely not LXDE, because pcmanfm has no trash. Can you see the trash in 'ls ~/Desktop'? Perhaps it's a desktop file? Indeed it is ~/Desktop/trash.desktop Since in fluxbox I don't see my Desktop, I don't know when it appeared. I guess that in the long term lxde should take that trash into account. -- 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 458180] Review Request: mailutils - Collection of GNU mail-related utilities
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=458180 --- Comment #9 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 06:19:30 EDT --- The conditionals are not used correctly. It should be along bcond_with ltdl and then in the configure invocation conditionals should be used. Also it seems to me that these should be mostly bcond_without since in the default case you want these features to be used. -- 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 466660] New: Review Request: sympy - A Python library for symbolic mathematics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sympy - A Python library for symbolic mathematics https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=40 Summary: Review Request: sympy - A Python library for symbolic mathematics 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://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/sympy.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/sympy-0.6.2-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: SymPy aims to become a full-featured computer algebra system (CAS) while keeping the code as simple as possible in order to be comprehensible and easily extensible. SymPy is written entirely in Python and does not require any external libraries. -- 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 466658] Review Request: VisualBoyAdvance - Nintendo Gameboy (,Advance,Color) Emulator
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=466658 --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 07:57:14 EDT --- Are you sure this software won't be against Fedora's emulator policy? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/SoftwareTypes#Emulators Also, from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Games : But generally, if it requires ROM files, image files, or a copy of the machines BIOS/firmware to work, we won't package it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459088] Review Request: protobuf - Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format
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=459088 --- Comment #20 from Lev Shamardin [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 07:40:47 EDT --- Release of protobuf-2.0.2-1.fc8.src.rpm SRPM URL: http://shamardin.googlepages.com/protobuf-2.0.2-1.fc8.src.rpm Spec URL: http://shamardin.googlepages.com/protobuf.spec Changes: * Sun Oct 12 2008 Lev Shamardin [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 2.0.2-1 - Update to version 2.0.2 - New -java and -javadoc subpackages. - Options to disable building of -python and -java* subpackages Additional comments: - This release adds possibility to disable building of python and java* subpackages, but they are enabled by default. - Java subpackages are built with maven2 according to Fedora packaging guidelines. - Original java sources depend on easymock for the tests which is not yet packaged for Fedora, so I had to remove all self testing stuff from java, but eventually it should be placed back. Any volunteers to package easymock for Fedora? - Requires java-devel = 1.6.0 to build. Waiting for the formal 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 442270] Review Request: lxde-common - Default configuration files for LXDE
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=442270 --- Comment #29 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:05:34 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=320139) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=320139) trash 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 442270] Review Request: lxde-common - Default configuration files for LXDE
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=442270 --- Comment #25 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 05:18:54 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=320137) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=320137) screenshot with empty text for terminal in the bar -- 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 442270] Review Request: lxde-common - Default configuration files for LXDE
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=442270 --- Comment #28 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:04:54 EDT --- Here are the associated times: Access: 2008-10-12 14:03:06.0 +0200 Modify: 2007-06-15 19:30:01.0 +0200 Change: 2007-06-15 19:30:01.0 +0200 -- 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 466658] Review Request: VisualBoyAdvance - Nintendo Gameboy (,Advance,Color) Emulator
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=466658 Mads Villadsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #3 from Mads Villadsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:01:57 EDT --- It seems more like something that belongs in the RPMFusion project at rpmfusion.org (where I think gnuboy is already packaged). -- 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 465372] Review Request: chntpw - Change passwords in Windows SAM 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=465372 Conrad Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Conrad Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 05:49:04 EDT --- Your suggestions are greatly appreciated. Thanks much for the review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: chntpw Short Description: Change passwords in Windows SAM files Owners: konradm Branches: 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 444366] Review Request: deco - Extractor for various archive file formats
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=444366 --- Comment #12 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 06:13:05 EDT --- Upstream changed a lot, now it is a C program and there is a separate deco-archive. -- 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 466658] New: Review Request: VisualBoyAdvance - Nintendo Gameboy (,Advance,Color) Emulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: VisualBoyAdvance - Nintendo Gameboy (,Advance,Color) Emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466658 Summary: Review Request: VisualBoyAdvance - Nintendo Gameboy (,Advance,Color) Emulator 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://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/VisualBoyAdvance.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/VisualBoyAdvance-1.7.2-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: VisualBoyAdvance is a Nintendo (TM) Gameboy and GameboyAdvance emulator with debugging capabilities. -- 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 442270] Review Request: lxde-common - Default configuration files for LXDE
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=442270 --- Comment #27 from Christoph Wickert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 07:33:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #25) screenshot with empty text for terminal in the bar Although this is not very user friendly it is the expected behavior ATM. :( (In reply to comment #26) Indeed it is ~/Desktop/trash.desktop Ok, and what is the command specified in this file? Since in fluxbox I don't see my Desktop, I don't know when it appeared. I guess that in the long term lxde should take that trash into account. When has this file been created? I guess it has been around on your desktop for a while but you did not see it because fluxbox does not support desktop files. -- 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 462251] Review Request: PyMOL - python molecular graphics
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=462251 --- Comment #23 from Tim Fenn [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 04:51:04 EDT --- Tested using F10 beta running: pymol-1.1-5.20080912svn3419.fc10.x86_64 mesa-libGL-7.2-0.7.fc10.x86_64 python-2.5.2-1.fc10.x86_64 nVidia Corporation GeForce 8600 GT (rev a1) (using the nv driver) no problems on startup, loaded a PDB file and ran a few checks, seemed OK. -- 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 466655] Review Request: libfplll - LLL-reduces euclidian lattices
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=466655 --- Comment #1 from Conrad Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 05:44:25 EDT --- Builds in koji [0]; rpmlint is silent. [0]: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=875176 -- 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 466655] New: Review Request: libfplll - LLL-reduces euclidian lattices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libfplll - LLL-reduces euclidian lattices https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466655 Summary: Review Request: libfplll - LLL-reduces euclidian lattices 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://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/libfplll.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/libfplll-3.0.9-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: fpLLL-3.0 contains several algorithms on lattices that rely on floating-point computations. This includes implementations of the floating-point LLL reduction algorithm, offering different speed/guarantees ratios. It contains a 'wrapper' choosing the estimated best sequence of variants in order to provide a guaranteed output as fast as possible. In the case of the wrapper, the succession of variants is oblivious to the user. It also includes a rigorous floating-point implementation of the Kannan-Fincke-Pohst algorithm that finds a shortest non-zero lattice vector. -- 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 442270] Review Request: lxde-common - Default configuration files for LXDE
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=442270 --- Comment #30 from Christoph Wickert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:16:04 EDT --- So this file has been there for quite a while and belongs to KDE because of the OnlyShowIn=KDE. Unfortunately pcmanfm does not honor OnlyShowIn. -- 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 #53 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:57:42 EDT --- sim-0.9.5-0.14.20080923svn2261rev.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sim-0.9.5-0.14.20080923svn2261rev.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 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 #55 from Pavel Alexeev [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:59:57 EDT --- Patrice Dumas, I add this, if you want. -- 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 #10 from Nicoleau Fabien [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:57:16
EDT ---
Hi, and thx for reviewing
Update :
Spec URL: http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/SPECS/printoxx.spec
SRPM URL:
http://nicoleau.fabien.free.fr/rpms/srpms.fc9/printoxx-1.6-3.fc9.src.rpm
I've updated the desktopfile, and I'm using --remove-category=Application.
I'm now using doc install from makefile. I don't know if I must keep it, or use
DOCDIR={_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} as a make parameter.
Now help is displayed when I click on help button.
As I don't have a printer, I tried with cups-pdf, and I worked.
Rpmlint is silent and rebuild under mock is OK.
--
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 #54 from Fedora Update System [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:57:48 EDT --- sim-0.9.5-0.14.20080923svn2261rev.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sim-0.9.5-0.14.20080923svn2261rev.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 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453017 Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||) --- Comment #31 from Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 08:57:09 EDT --- Thank you for continuing to work on this. Anyway: 1. please use lowercase-only package names 2. please add a fontconfig file to each font so it's sorted in the right category 3. please use more descriptive package descriptions so users actually know what they're downloading 4. please make sure the fontconfig scriptlets are actually included in every package Here is a rough draft on how it should be done (I really should be reviewing other font packages instead of rewriting individual package submissions) http://nim.fedorapeople.org/un-extra-fonts.spec http://nim.fedorapeople.org/un-extra-fonts-1.0.2-0.6.080608.fc10.src.rpm It still needs: 1. proofing and completing of the package descriptions. 2. checking each font is assigned to the correct fontconfig generic family 3. checking the 66 priority is all right (with japanese people at least I think) Some of the changes are probably interesting for un-core as well. Please make all of those changes so I can move to the formal review step. Also the previous remarks on having upstream take a position on GPLv3 / adding font exception / providing sfd sources still stand though we should probably not block on them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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 #56 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 09:19:09 EDT --- It is not 'if I want', it is a blocker. -- 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 244192] Review Request: eclipse-anyedit - AnyEdit plugin for Eclipse
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=244192 --- Comment #29 from rob [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 09:37:14 EDT --- here is one that actually works properly on rawhide, in addition to building properly on rawhide: http://rmyers.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-anyedit/eclipse-anyedit-2.1.1-2.fc10.src.rpm http://rmyers.fedorapeople.org/eclipse-anyedit/eclipse-anyedit-2.1.1-2.fc10/eclipse-anyedit.spec -- 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 464308] Review Request: apt-mirror - APT sources mirroring 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=464308 --- Comment #8 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 09:44:19 EDT --- SPEC: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/apt-mirror-0.4.5/apt-mirror.spec SRPM: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/apt-mirror-0.4.5/apt-mirror-0.4.5-3.fc10.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 464308] Review Request: apt-mirror - APT sources mirroring 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=464308 Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 09:58:46 EDT --- Package Name: apt-mirror Short Description: APT sources mirroring tool Owners: cassmodiah Branches: F9 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 464308] Review Request: apt-mirror - APT sources mirroring 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=464308 manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464308] Review Request: apt-mirror - APT sources mirroring 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=464308 --- Comment #10 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 10:37:37 EDT --- Simon, if possible, please consider maintaining EPEL branches, too. TIA. -- 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 466648] Review Request: dnstracer - Trace a DNS record to its start of authority
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=466648 manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added 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 457492] Review Request: procbench - Multiplatform information tool and CPU benchmark for x86 procs
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=457492 Adel Gadllah [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Adel Gadllah [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 11:14:44 EDT --- Package imported and built so closing this one. -- 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 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453017 --- Comment #32 from Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 11:27:18 EDT --- Also note that the conf.d/conf.avail changes depend on the discussion of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_spec_template_correction_(fontconfig) which is not an official Fedora guideline yet (and may change during 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 464308] Review Request: apt-mirror - APT sources mirroring 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=464308 --- Comment #11 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 11:32:53 EDT --- Package Name: apt-mirror Short Description: APT sources mirroring tool Owners: cassmodiah Branches: F-9 EL-4 EL-5 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 459925] Review Request: libowfat - Reimplementation of libdjb
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=459925 Simon Wesp [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459926] Review Request: swing-worker - Long running Swing GUI interacting tasks
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=459926 Simon Wesp [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461407] Review Request: laf-plugin - Generic plugin framework for Java look-and-feels
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=461407 Simon Wesp [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461408] Review Request: laf-widget - Support and base set of additional behaviour and widgets in java look-and-feels
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=461408 Simon Wesp [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461418] Review Request: appframework - Swing Application Framework 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=461418 Simon Wesp [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461822] Review Request: gnu-trove - High performance collections for Java
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=461822 Simon Wesp [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459631] Review Request: insight - GDB debugger GUI
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=459631
Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #11 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 11:35:50 EDT
---
Well,
* Desktop Categories
- The Categories Application X-Fedora are now deprecated
and should be removed.
(To remove Application, you can add --remove-category=Application
option to desktop-file-utils)
* Timestamps
- Please consider to use
-
make install DESTDIR=${RPM_BUILD_ROOT} INSTALL=install -p
-
to keep timestamps on files to be installed as much
as possible.
This method usually works for Makefiles generated by
recent autotools.
! Other things are okay
- license correct (GPLv3+)
- builds successfully, build log good
- spec description good
- can be installed
- _seems_ to work
-
This package (insight) is APPROVED by 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 461411] Review Request: jhlabs-filters - Java Image Filters
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=461411 Simon Wesp [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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 466648] Review Request: dnstracer - Trace a DNS record to its start of authority
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=466648
manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 11:42:34
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: devel/x86_64
[x] Rpmlint output:
source RPM: empty
binary RPM:empty
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n))
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type:BSD
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SHA1SUM of package: b8c60b281c0eb309acd1b1551c51cccb951685c7
/tmp/dnstracer-1.9.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: devel/x86_64, Centos4/i386
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: devel/x86_64, Centos4/i386
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
*** APPROVED ***
If possible, please consider maintaining this package for EPEL, too. TIA.
--
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 466648] Review Request: dnstracer - Trace a DNS record to its start of authority
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=466648 Ray Van Dolson [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Ray Van Dolson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 11:55:00 EDT --- Thanks wolfy for the speedy review (and whoops on the initial goof when I filed this thing). New Package CVS Request === Package Name: dnstracer Short Description: Trace a DNS record to its start of authority Owners: rayvd Branches: F-8 F-9 EL-5 EL-4 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 456527] Review Request: gentium-basic-fonts - Gentium Basic Font Family
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=456527 Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||om) --- Comment #7 from Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 11:55:53 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) I am little unsure about what to substitute for faces. The families are generically serif for all the fonts in this package. You basically need to tell fontconfig in the Gentium package if something asks for Gentium Basic, use Gentium if it's not available and the reverse in the other package. Plus tell fontconfig it's a serif package. Like I wrote that's the same magic we do for dejavu full and dejavu lgc, just look at their fontconfig files and copy the dejavu full to dejavu lgc rules (replacing with gentium and gentium basic) Don't bother about F-8, it's better to have a good devel package and worry afterwards of previous distros. At this rate F-8 will be EOL-ed before you have any package in the distro :( -- 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 443238] Review Request: cave9 - 3d clone of SFCave.
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=443238 --- Comment #11 from Alexey Torkhov [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 12:07:05 EDT --- Victor, any 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 459535] Review Request: backup-manager - A command line backup tool for GNU/Linux
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=459535 --- Comment #7 from Guillaume Kulakowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 12:15:31 EDT --- I have add a daily cron and an option in backup-manager.conf. Put BM_DAILY_CRON to true for active daily cron. -- spec: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/SPECS/backup-manager.spec rpm: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/RPMS/fc9/noarch/backup-manager-0.7.7-3.fc9.noarch.rpm src: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/SRPMS/fc9/backup-manager-0.7.7-3.fc9.src.rpm -- -- Other RPMS : FC6: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/RPMS/fc6/noarch/backup-manager-0.7.7-3.fc6.noarch.rpm FC8: http://www.llaumgui.com/public/rpm/RPMS/fc8/noarch/backup-manager-0.7.7-3.fc8.noarch.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 456182] Review Request: rssh - Restricted shell for use with OpenSSH, allowing only scp and/or sftp
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=456182 --- Comment #15 from Debarshi Ray [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 12:20:46 EDT --- Is there anything which is keeping us from closing this? -- 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 457281] Review Request: unikurd-fonts - A widely used Kurdish font
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=457281 Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||) --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 12:22:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) --unofficial review-- Thank you for the nice unofficial review Ankur, I'll take up from there. Michal: The spec is an almost perfect copy from official guidelines, that makes it easy to review, thanks Blocking remarks 1. unless upstream has confirmed 1.0 is the actual font revision, and it will version further updates, please use 20020502 as version ⇒ check the version 2. Please add a fontconfig file as Ankur suggested. Since unikurd covers unicode blocks Behdad is interested in, I think it shouldn't be too hard to get him to help you (I doubt he wants you to stomp on farsi) ⇒ add some fontconfig rules 3. unless you *know* upstream is going to release new fonts in the same archive, there is no need to prepare for subpackaging. Upstream is just as likely to publish separate archives, which will mean separate packages (see the gfs fonts for examples). If upstream does end up adding new fonts to this very archive, you can always go the obsolete route ⇒ drop the just in case subpackaging Non blocking remarks 1. please have upstream add the GPL font exception to their font 2. please have upstream provide sfd sources if they use fontforge -- 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: 69oldstandard-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 Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |oldstandard-fonts - Old |69oldstandard-fonts - Old |Standard Fonts |Standard 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 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 Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||.com) --- Comment #16 from Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 12:44:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) ok ..will fix them soon I'll review it just as soon as you post a new spec file, I promise :) -- 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: 69oldstandard-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 Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC|[EMAIL PROTECTED] | Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||o.co.in) --- Comment #5 from Nicolas Mailhot [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 12:40:51 EDT --- Also: 1. please rebuild from sfd sources since they're available. Very basic examples are in the inconsolata package, more complete makefiles in dejavu or liberation 2. please rename the font in the process as upstream does not want us to use the same font name if we rebuild the fonts (just a sed on the sfd before the build) 3. you probably want to target the OTF variant http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Choosing_the_right_font_format_to_package 4. please add a fontconfig rule that substitute your new name to old standard so documents that reference old standards continue to work 5. 69 is probably a bit low as priority, 60 would be fine for a good cyrillic font as this one is 6. why do you feel you need to change hinting for this font? 7. please register it as a serif font in fontconfig Anyway Old standard is a very nice font and I hope you'll make a nice package from it -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459944] Review Request: pfstools - Programs for handling high-dynamic range images
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=459944 --- Comment #14 from Ulrich Drepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 14:41:37 EDT --- I've uploaded a new .spec file and .src.rpm. Sorry for the delay, too many things happening at the same time. http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools-1.6.5-3.fc9.src.rpm http://people.redhat.com/drepper/pfstools.spec When I run rpmlint I still get some warning: $ rpmlint -i RPMS/x86_64/pfstools*-1.6.5-3.fc9.x86_64.rpm pfstools-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. pfstools-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. 9 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. These should be fine. The documentation files for the -libs and -devel package are the same as for the main package. No need to duplicate them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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 #11 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12
14:47:22 EDT ---
I think you should keep %doc doc/* in the %files section and use
DOCDIR={_docdir}/%{name}-%{version} as a make parameter (plus maybe some
other parameters to make things work properly).
If you have a look at /usr/share/doc directory you will see that pretty much
all the applications have their doc directories as %{name}-%{version}. Let's
keep things the way they are.
Other than that, the package is ready to go.
--
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 466658] Review Request: VisualBoyAdvance - Nintendo Gameboy (,Advance,Color) Emulator
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=466658 --- Comment #4 from Conrad Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 14:50:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Are you sure this software won't be against Fedora's emulator policy? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/SoftwareTypes#Emulators Also, from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Games : But generally, if it requires ROM files, image files, or a copy of the machines BIOS/firmware to work, we won't package it. Well, that's why I submitted it, I want to find out if it is acceptable in Fedora (RPMFusion does not allow packages which could be included in Fedora). Could this not be used to run homebrew (and thus not patented nor copyrighted) games etc? -- 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 466660] Review Request: sympy - A Python library for symbolic mathematics
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=40 --- Comment #1 from Conrad Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 15:04:10 EDT --- Builds in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=875246 -- 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 461912] Review Request: puzzles - A collection of one-player puzzle games
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=461912 --- Comment #3 from Sergio Pascual [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 15:25:18 EDT --- Package fails to build in mock. You need to add BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils -- 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 226212] Merge Review: OpenIPMI
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=226212 Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Ville Skyttä [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 15:48:20 EDT --- Partial/initial review comments moved from bug 466343: 1) BuildRequires: tcl-devel would result in some TCL support built in. Not sure if it's desirable though, but would be good to explicitly enable/disable it for reproducible builds. 2) A private copy of libedit is used; would be good to make use of the separately packaged system libedit. 3) A GUI is included in the sources, but not installed. Is this on purpose? 4) ipmitool seems to be capable of using freeipmi as well. I haven't tried it but I suppose BuildRequires: freeipmi-devel would build it in. Same thing as comment 1) about reproducible builds applies, but wouldn't it make sense to split ipmitool into a completely separate package instead of bundling it in here? The Mandriva openipmi package seems to have a bunch of improvements over the Fedora/EL one, such as TCL support, UI (whose separation allows fewer dependencies in the main package, e.g. TCL) and GUI subpackages. -- 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 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 #17 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 16:10:14 EDT --- Done for mediawiki-imagemap-0-0.1.r37906.fc8 and mediawiki-imagemap-0-0.1.r37906.fc9 When pushing mediawiki-imagemap-0-0.1.r37906.fc10 I get an error: - 500 Internal error The server encountered an unexpected condition which prevented it from fulfilling the request. Powered by CherryPy 2.3.0 - :-?? -- 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 464424] Review Request: GROMACS - a Molecular Dynamics package
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=464424 --- Comment #48 from Jussi Lehtola [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 16:18:00 EDT --- Since the discussion on fedora-packaging seems to have ceased without reaching a conclusion and there isn't a need to be able to have many versions of Gromacs concurrently installed, I have removed the support for environment-modules and just renamed all binaries to start with g_ . Since everything resides in standard locations the package should now be acceptable for distribution, please review. http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/gromacs.spec http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/gromacs-4.0-1.fc9.src.rpm gromacs.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-bash.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-bash.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/bash_completion.d/gromacs4 gromacs-csh.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized csh GROMACS support gromacs-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-mpi.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-mpi-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-mpi-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-tutor.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-zsh.x86_64: W: no-documentation gromacs-zsh.x86_64: W: summary-not-capitalized zsh GROMACS support 12 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 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. ___ 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 --- Comment #17 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 16:23:29 EDT --- done for: htmlparser-1.6-3.fc8 htmlparser-1.6-3.fc9 Dunno how to do the equivalent for 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 466688] New: Review Request: mpfi - An interval arithmetic library based on MPFR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mpfi - An interval arithmetic library based on MPFR https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466688 Summary: Review Request: mpfi - An interval arithmetic library based on MPFR 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://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/mpfi.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/mpfi-1.3.4RC3-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: MPFI is intended to be a portable library written in C for arbitrary precision interval arithmetic with intervals represented using MPFR reliable floating-point numbers. It is based on the GNU MP library and on the MPFR library and is part of the latter. The purpose of an arbitrary precision interval arithmetic is on the one hand to get guaranteed results, thanks to interval computation, and on the other hand to obtain accurate results, thanks to multiple precision arithmetic. The MPFI library is built upon MPFR in order to benefit from the correct roundings provided by MPFR. Further advantages of using MPFR are its portability and compliance with the IEEE 754 standard for floating-point arithmetic. -- 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 #57 from Pavel Alexeev [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 16:59:52 EDT --- It is not blocker - sim already in fedora updated many time. However, in any case it is also already added and updates submited (see below). -- 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|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) | --- Comment #35 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 17:00:57 EDT --- Opened ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/854 -- 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 464424] Review Request: GROMACS - a Molecular Dynamics package
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=464424 --- Comment #49 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 17:10:41 EDT --- $ wget http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/gromacs-4.0-1.fc9.src.rpm --2008-10-12 23:10:01-- http://theory.physics.helsinki.fi/~jzlehtol/rpms/gromacs-4.0-1.fc9.src.rpm Resolving theory.physics.helsinki.fi... 128.214.57.188 Connecting to theory.physics.helsinki.fi|128.214.57.188|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden 2008-10-12 23:10:01 ERROR 403: Forbidden. -- 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 #58 from Patrice Dumas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 17:11:31 EDT --- (In reply to comment #57) It is not blocker - sim already in fedora updated many time. It should not have been accepted with some blocking issues that were still present when it was approved, but went unnoticed. Having the package built doesn't mean that it is in shape for fedora. There are still many packages from the former fedora core that are not in good shape, also. However, in any case it is also already added and updates submited (see below). It seems to be fixed in cvs, 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 464781] Review Request: flexdock - Java docking UI element. First package.
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=464781 Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 17:17:04 EDT --- Please read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines and specially http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java You have to use macro for the spec file (that what miss most to start review). Please also read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers So you can get sponsored. For license problem, it is the one on top of each source file (if any) that matter. I have matio ready if you want to save time on scilab5 packaging...(i will submit it 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 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 #17 from Ismael Olea [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 17:35:11 EDT --- Pushed into bodhi. Thanks for the tip! -- 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 464781] Review Request: flexdock - Java docking UI element. First package.
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=464781 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks||177841 --- Comment #3 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 18:02:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0) Spec URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/flexdock.spec SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/flexdock-0.5.1-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: flexdock java class files JNI generated binary. Provides Swing GUIs with a dock user interface element. Uploading as library is required for (later) packaging of Scilab. Are you going to package Scilab, too, then? That's great. Let me know if I can help either with packaging or reviewing. I can also sponsor you, but please do a couple of reviews and point me to them. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 466692] New: Review Request: iml - Finds solutions to systems of linear equations over integers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: iml - Finds solutions to systems of linear equations over integers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=466692 Summary: Review Request: iml - Finds solutions to systems of linear equations over integers 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://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/iml.spec SRPM URL: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/iml-1.0.2-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: IML package provides efficient routines to solve nonsingular systems of linear equations, certified solve any shape systems of linear equations, and perform mod p matrix operations, such as computing row-echelon form, determinant, rank profile, inverse of a mod p matrix. -- 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 462309] Review Request: publican-ovirt - Common documentation files for oVirt
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=462309 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 19:25:31 EDT --- 8e60459257b6ec5d43ad34b5cd330a8f publican-ovirt-0.4.tgz Thanks - looks good now. Package is APPROVED for inclusion 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. ___ 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 #17 from Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 20:40:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #15) Nicolas, I feel like this would be a good candidate for naming arabeyes-Thabit-fonts. lowercase please The upstream name is clearly Thabit: do you think we should lowercase it? Personally I usually prefer to preserve upstream casing 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. ___ 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 Warren Togami [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #4 from Warren Togami [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 20:45:18 EDT --- http://togami.com/~k12linux-temporary/fedora/9/src/ltsp-server-livesetupdocs-0.0.1-1.fc9.src.rpm I ran out of time and had to spin with something so I made my own package. Unassigning myself because I cannot review my own package. -- 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 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 Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |Thabit-fonts -Thabit-fonts |Thabit-fonts from |from Arabeyes.org |Arabeyes.org -- 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 448072] Review Request: spin-kickstarts - Kickstarts and templates for creating custom Fedora Spins
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=448072 --- Comment #12 from Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 20:58:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) The review is completed, unless someone thinks that I need to look over the package again. Sorry: I meant it would be good time to build this now for f10 final. -- 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 455358] Review Request: xslthl - XSLT Syntax Highlighting for saxon and xalan
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=455358 --- Comment #4 from Nigel Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:01:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) I retrieved the latest source from the upstream developer and created a new spec file from scratch. Spec URL: http://jfearn.fedorapeople.org/files/xslthl.spec SRPM URL: http://jfearn.fedorapeople.org/files/xslthl-2.0.0.0.fc9.src.rpm Per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java#BuildRequires_and_Requires you need: BR: java-devel = 1:1.6.0 Depend: java = 1:1.6.0 Seems to build with that, I'll finish the review on the basis that this has been done and we'll go from there. -- 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: 69oldstandard-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 #6 from Jens Petersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:07:54 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/oldstandard-fonts/69oldstandard-fonts-1-1.fc9.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/oldstandard-fonts/69oldstandard-fonts.spec I still don't understand why the package is being named 69oldstandard-fonts?? Is the correct name 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 448072] Review Request: spin-kickstarts - Kickstarts and templates for creating custom Fedora Spins
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=448072 Jeroen van Meeuwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #13 from Jeroen van Meeuwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:16:46 EDT --- Built for rawhide from the master branch http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=876171 -- 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 465758] Review Request: perl-Net-Daemon - Perl extension for portable daemons
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=465758 manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:35:08 EDT --- Indeed, all tests worked locally and, according to the advices I have received via IRC, not running the tests during koji build is fine. I'll do a full review soon, but could you please consider wrapping the disabled tests in a conditional block, so that one could do a local build in the form rpmbuild --rebuild with tests perl-Net-Daemon ? It's not a blocker, but I think it is more elegant than blindly deleting them and it only takes very few additional lines in the 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. ___ 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 Bug 428798 depends on bug 460287, which changed state. Bug 460287 Summary: Review Request: htmlparser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460287 What|Old Value |New Value 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 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 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #18 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:55:32 EDT --- Currently there is no need to submit a push request for F-10. When you think F-8/9 packages can be moved from testing to stable repository, please edit the submitted request on bodhi. Now closing. -- 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 465372] Review Request: chntpw - Change passwords in Windows SAM 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=465372 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:53:11 EDT --- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455396] Review Request: TrustedQSL - TrustedQSL ham-radio 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=455396 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:55:25 EDT --- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460707] Review Request: httperf - Tool for measuring web server performance
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=460707 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:54:26 EDT --- 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. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 466241] Review Request: starlab - A Software Environment for Collisional Stellar Dynamics
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=466241 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:56:47 EDT --- 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. ___ 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 Bug 428798 depends on bug 460289, which changed state. Bug 460289 Summary: Review Request: vldocking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460289 What|Old Value |New Value 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 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 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #16 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-10-12 21:57:02 EDT --- Now closing. When you think F-8/9 packages can be moved from testing to stable repositories, please edit the submitted requests on 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
