[Bug 461429] Review Request: zsync - Incremental file-transfer program without special 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=461429 Debarshi Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #4 from Debarshi Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 03:33:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > @ Debarshi: > Sorry for "stealing" your review, but I promised to finish John's pre-review > for educational purposes before I sponsor him. I hope you don't mind. No problem. I got a bit busy with fixing some of my packages before the freeze deadline, so it is good that you took 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 451772] Review Request: ume-launcher - a full screen application launcher for gnome
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=451772 Alex Lancaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Flag||needinfo? -- Configure 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 451772] Review Request: ume-launcher - a full screen application launcher for gnome
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=451772 Alex Lancaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Resolution|NEXTRELEASE | --- Comment #17 from Alex Lancaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 03:44:11 EDT --- This package has never been built successfully on rawhide: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=6917 and should not have passed review or been closed. This is currently causing broken deps in rawhide, because it is inheriting from the F-9 build which is built against an oder version of libgnome: Broken deps for i386 -- ume-launcher-0.6.3-1.fc9.i386 requires libgnome-desktop-2.so.2 ume-launcher-0.6.3-1.fc9.i386 requires libclutter-glx-0.6.so.0 Please fix ASAP. -- Configure 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 451772] Review Request: ume-launcher - a full screen application launcher for gnome
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=451772 Alex Lancaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | Flag|needinfo? |needinfo?(jonathan.roberts. ||[EMAIL PROTECTED]) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468562] Review Request: basket - Taking care of your ideas
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=468562 José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks|177841 | Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #2 from José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 04:12:26 EDT --- Basket is already in Fedora: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/basket -- Configure 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 451772] Review Request: ume-launcher - a full screen application launcher for gnome
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=451772 --- Comment #18 from Jonathan Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 04:19:22 EDT --- It fails to build on rawhide because of an error with the way it looks for intltool... upstream have renamed the package and have a newer version under the new name that does build. A renamed package involves a new review, though? Is it best to kill this package and get the new one in? I have to run, will try and fix again later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426698] Review Request: libical - Reference implementation of the iCalendar data type and serialization 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=426698 Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 04:33:56 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libical New Branches: EL-5 New branch Owners: lkundrak Rishi, the Fedora maintainer of the package: "Right now I don't want to dive into EPEL because I have my hands full with Fedora. So it would be nice if you could maintain the EL branch." -- Configure 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 455165] Review-Request: maatkit - Essential command-line utilities for MySQL
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=455165 --- Comment #4 from Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 04:40:33 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 426698] Review Request: libical - Reference implementation of the iCalendar data type and serialization 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=426698 --- Comment #23 from Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:00:29 EDT --- cvs done. You need to go to pkgdb to ask for the commit access though -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426698] Review Request: libical - Reference implementation of the iCalendar data type and serialization 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=426698 Huzaifa S. Sidhpurwala <[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 466737] Review Request: matio - Library for reading/writing Matlab MAT 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=466737 --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:09:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > 1. Why don't you have just one patch for the fortran-related stuff? Remove > commented sed line. The first is the patch sent upstream. The second is the patch against configure which ends to be specific with the sources version used. > 2. To my understanding you don't need the zlib patch, since you require zlib > >= > 1.2.3 (the bug is only present in zlib 1.2.2). Remove patch0. wrong, there is nothing common with the zlib 1.2.2 bug and the undefined-non-weak-symbol related to a missing -lz at link time. > 3. Remove all rpath related stuff, matio builds fine without them. wrong, not in x86_64 at least. The cause is the autotools version used to generate the source archive. > 4-5-6. man doxygen and pdf is the same content. Thus to provide the 3 -- Configure 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 462181] Review Request: teeworlds - Online multi-player platform 2D shooter
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=462181 --- Comment #7 from Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:14:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > i spoke with upstream > > teeworlds 0.5 will be released in a few weeks > > bam is up to now unversioned. with teeworlds 0.5 bam will be versioned. > > perhaps we should really start with 0.5? > > what do you mean? We have communicated this via IRC with result "Package anything that works" :) Any progress here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454412] Review Request: mingw32-runtime - MinGW Windows cross-compiler runtime and root filesystem
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=454412 --- Comment #9 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:19:13 EDT --- s/it/is/ -- Configure 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 454412] Review Request: mingw32-runtime - MinGW Windows cross-compiler runtime and root filesystem
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=454412 --- Comment #8 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:18:58 EDT --- Do you have a spec file for boost, re comment 7? I have a pretty rubbish one: http://hg.et.redhat.com/misc/fedora-mingw--devel?cmd=manifest;manifest=c1faf15c38245919737c88541c025a9e9dc1bea0;path=/boost/ It builds just enough to work with Inkscape, but it extremely hacky. -- Configure 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 466737] Review Request: matio - Library for reading/writing Matlab MAT 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=466737 --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:34:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > > 3. Remove all rpath related stuff, matio builds fine without them. > wrong, not in x86_64 at least. The cause is the autotools version used to > generate the source archive. Actually, I built matio-1.3.3 in x86_64 with and had no trouble with rpaths. Didn't patch anything, though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 451772] Review Request: ume-launcher - a full screen application launcher for gnome
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=451772 --- Comment #19 from Alex Lancaster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:34:02 EDT --- (In reply to comment #18) > It fails to build on rawhide because of an error with the way it looks for > intltool... upstream have renamed the package and have a newer version under > the new name that does build. Yes, I thought it was something like that. > A renamed package involves a new review, though? Is it best to kill this > package and get the new one in? Yes, I think so. Meanwhile, can you file a bug with rel-eng: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng requesting blocking ume-launcher from rawhide, and then delete your pending build via bodhi for F-9? > I have to run, will try and fix again later. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467530] Review Request: ladvd - CDP/LLDP sender for unix
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=467530 Andreas Thienemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Andreas Thienemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:45:12 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: ladvd Owners: ixs New Branches: EL-5 EL-4 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461400] Review Request: cherokee - Flexible and Fast Webserver
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=461400 Pavel Lisý <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |com)| --- Comment #15 from Pavel Lisý <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:50:43 EDT --- I wrote directly to your email. Did you receive it? Now I am little bit further. I have made first CVS commits to every branches but I am now sure what to do next. Do I have to add package to Bodhi or this is only for updates? How can I add package to "comps" files? Is it relevant yet? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 448435] Review Request: PythonCard - PythonCard GUI construction toolkit
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=448435 Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 05:51:53 EDT --- Imported and built. -- Configure 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 445010] Review Request: xvarstar - an astronomical program used for searching GCVS
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=445010 Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #24 from Lubomir Rintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 06:39:08 EDT --- Imported and built. Thanks for the 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 447456] Review Request: gupnp-tools: a collection of dev tools utilising GUPnP and GTK+
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=447456 Peter Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #24 from Peter Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 06:45:16 EDT --- Built and in rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458054] Review Request: arm4 - Application Response Measurement (ARM) agent
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=458054 --- Comment #5 from David Carter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 06:51:19 EDT --- I'm encountering many small selinux issues that keep holding me up. I'm going to prepare a non-selinux release until these are fixed. I should have this ready within a day or two. -- Configure 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 461794] Review Request:0xFFFF - The Open Free Fiasco Firmware Flasher
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=461794 --- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 07:01:16 EDT --- David, Manuel approved your package. Now you can go on with the CVS procedure. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CVSAdminProcedure -- Configure 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 468189] Review Request: rear - Relax and Recovery (disaster recovery framework)
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=468189 --- Comment #9 from Gratien D'haese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 07:37:27 EDT --- Hi all, Busy with correcting the rear.spec and some other comments you mentioned above. I've seeing now: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ rpmlint -i /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SRPMS/rear-1.7.8-1.fc9.src.rpm rear.src: W: strange-permission rear.spec 0600 A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ rpmlint -i /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/rear-1.7.8-1.fc9.noarch.rpm rear.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/rear-1.7.8/contrib ./usr/share/rear/contrib The relative symbolic link points nowhere. rear.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/rear/skel/default/bin/sh bash The relative symbolic link points nowhere. rear.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/share/rear/skel/default/.bash_history The file or directory is hidden. You should see if this is normal, and delete it from the package if not. rear.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/rear-1.7.8/README ./usr/share/rear/README The relative symbolic link points nowhere. rear.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/doc/rear-1.7.8/CHANGES ./usr/share/rear/CHANGES The relative symbolic link points nowhere. rear.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/rear/skel/default/init bin/init The relative symbolic link points nowhere. rear.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/rear/skel/default/var/log/lastlog rear.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/rear/skel/default/var/lib/nfs/state rear.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/rear/skel/default/etc/mtab 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 6 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECS]$ rpmlint -i /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SRPMS/rear-1.7. Error: no installed packages by name /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SRPMS/rear-1.7. 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. ==> Rear makes usage of relative symbolic links. Is there a way to suppress these warning? Or is it safe to ignore? ==> the zero-length file are necessary when we build a boot image. We can safely ignore these errors. Is there a way to tell in rear.spec file to say we can ignore "zero length" files? Would like to avoid submitting a new version which still produces errors during a rpmlint investigation. thanks, Gratien -- Configure 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 466496] Review Request: python-suds - A lightweight python soap web services client
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=466496
--- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 07:44:22
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> Implemented all suggestions with the exception of changing %Source0 to be a
> URL
> to the fedorahosted wiki. I'm not sure I understand this. If I make this
> change, rpmbuild fails. Also, I looked at (2) other fedora hosted projects
> that I'm pretty sure are fedora packages and their %Source0 looked like mine.
> Can you help me understand this better?
The problem seems to be the path (...?format=raw, rpmbuild can't handle GET in
an URL). I'm sorry that I guided you in the wrong direction about this.
The guys from 'Fedora Python Modules' [1] use in their spec file [2] the
following entry:
Source0:
https://fedorahosted.org/releases/p/y/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz
But the directory of suds is empty (
https://fedorahosted.org/releases/s/u/suds/ ) .
The Fedora Hosted FAQ tells you how you can publish a tarball.
from https://fedorahosted.org/web/en/faq
"How can I publish archive releases (tgz, zip, etc) for my project?
Create the archive on your workstation and run scp myProject-0.1.tar.gz
fedorahosted.org:. The archive will be located under
https://fedorahosted.org/releases/";
> Also, seems like the spec should be named suds.spec. Can I change this?
>From my point of view the name is ok. [3]
[1] https://fedorahosted.org/python-fedora/
[2]
https://fedorahosted.org/python-fedora/browser/python-fedora-stable/python-fedora.spec
[3]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28python_modules.29
--
Configure 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 466496] Review Request: python-suds - A lightweight python soap web services client
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=466496 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 07:58:07 EDT --- Appendices: I can't sponsor you, but I can help you with my limited packaging skills. If you are still seeking a sponsor, get in touch with Tom "spot" Callaway about your spnsorship because I don't know the right way for RH employees or if it's different from the standard way of sponsorship. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored After you made changes to your spec file, please bump the release. This ways it's easier to rack the changes for everybody. -- Configure 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 458054] Review Request: arm4 - Application Response Measurement (ARM) agent
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=458054 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:34:36 EDT --- Excellent. -- Configure 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 455165] Review-Request: maatkit - Essential command-line utilities for MySQL
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=455165 Jon Ciesla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:36:36 EDT --- Sven, FYI, it's best to not let updates to reviews sit more than two weeks. If for some reason you're unable to complete the review, it's best to unassign it from your self so it's clear what's going on and another reviewer can be sought. Lubomir, if need be, I can finish this. -J -- Configure 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 454412] Review Request: mingw32-runtime - MinGW Windows cross-compiler runtime and root filesystem
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=454412 --- Comment #10 from Harry Waye <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:45:06 EDT --- I don't have time to look at it at the moment. The person I spoke to in #boost was volodya. It was also very hacky. There were some tickets made for it on https://zigzag.lvk.cs.msu.su:7813/boost.build/ but I don't remember which ones. -- Configure 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 462163] Review Request: checkdns - A Domain Name Server analysis and reporting 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=462163 manuel wolfshant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #8 from manuel wolfshant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:43:05 EDT --- John, do you want to submit a new version or should I review the existing one (which we already know that has at least two blockers) ? -- Configure 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 455165] Review-Request: maatkit - Essential command-line utilities for MySQL
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=455165 --- Comment #6 from Sven Lankes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:47:32 EDT --- Sorry. In my head this review had the status 'waiting for packager' when in reality it really is 'packager waiting for reviewer'. I'll work on this tonight. -- Configure 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 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF 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=457955 Ankur Sinha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |o.co.in)| --- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:52:34 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > Ok, I'll take this review > > 1. Please do not use 69bonvenocf-fonts as package name. Use bonvenocf-fonts or > cf-bonveno-fonts (cf-bonveno-fonts is probably better as it will give you a > Crude Factory prefix to use with other Crude Factory fonts) > > 2. Please use install -dm 755 instead of mkdir as suggested by the official > spec template > > 3. You can remove the "for example" comment > > 4. 69 is a bit low as fontconfig prefix, 64 is probably sufficient for a latin > font > > 5. Use 1.1 as version since upstream provides a nicely versionned archive > > 6. Since upstream provides sfd sources, please build the ttf from source using > fontforge. You have an example of sfd building in bug #467507 for example > > 7. the font is GPLv2 + font exception (cf README) > > 8. Why do you want to disable hinting for this font? > > 9. Why do you want to prepend en to the font? > > 10. Please reformat your xml files with xmllint --format before submission so > they are nicely indented with the same rules as other font packages > > 11. When you've written fontconfig rules you're happy with it's always a good > idea to send them upstream to be included in the font next releases > > 12. Please fine a way to add Barry Schwartz' name in the summary (flattering > font designers is good for our interactions with them) > > 14. Please update http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BonvenoCF_font to remove the > font from the wishlist (change the Catzgorization). You should not need > packaging powers to do that, just a FAS account > > All in all, that's not too bad an attempt for a first font package. Fix all > this, and I'll sponsor you if that's still needed hi, rebuilt the package with your guidelines, as much as i could understand: SPEC: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/BonvenoCF-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts.spec SRPM: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/BonvenoCF-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1-1.fc9.src.rpm I dint know how to tackle point 8 9 10 I dont think i know enough for sposnorship yet. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF 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=457955 --- Comment #5 from Ankur Sinha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:59:51 EDT --- tackled point 8 and 9.. SPEC: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/BonvenoCF-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts.spec SRPM: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/BonvenoCF-fonts/cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1-1.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455165] Review-Request: maatkit - Essential command-line utilities for MySQL
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=455165 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:57:33 EDT --- If I had a nickel for every time I'd done that. . . -- Configure 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 452107] Review Request: cfdg - Context Free Design Grammar
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=452107 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 08:58:44 EDT --- cfdg-2.1-5.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/cfdg-2.1-5.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 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 Ankur Sinha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |o.co.in)| --- Comment #12 from Ankur Sinha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 09:16:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) > BTW if you need to see an example of programmaticaly changing a font name at > build time, just check how DejaVu does it for DejaVu LGC in its build scripts hi, rebuilt: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/oldstandard-fonts/oldstandard-sfd-fonts-1.1-1.fc9.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/oldstandard-fonts/oldstandard-sfd-fonts.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 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633
Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:07:32
EDT ---
Just some small comments on your spec file
- Release: 1.0%{?dist}
- Just '1' is enough. Next release will be '2'
- You can use the macro %{name} everywhere where you used 'wput'
- %files section
- '%defattr(-,root,root)', the usual one is '%defattr(-,root,root,-)'
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#.25files_section
- Is it not enough just to use '%{_bindir}/%{name}' insteed of '%attr(0755,
root, root) %{_bindir}/wput' ?
--
Configure 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 459924] Review Request: Homestead - 3D real-time network visualiser
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=459924 --- Comment #23 from R P Herrold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:09:50 EDT --- looks great -- thank you -- It certainly meets my approval -- Russ herrold -- Configure 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 459924] Review Request: Homestead - 3D real-time network visualiser
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=459924 --- Comment #22 from Simon Wesp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:08:46 EDT --- SPEC: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/homestead-0.87/homestead.spec SRPM: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/homestead-0.87/homestead-0.87-1.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 459924] Review Request: Homestead - 3D real-time network visualiser
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=459924 Simon Wesp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #24 from Simon Wesp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:11:26 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: homestead Short Description: 3D real-time network visualiser Owners: cassmodiah Branches: F-9 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 466496] Review Request: python-suds - A lightweight python soap web services client
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=466496 --- Comment #5 from Jeff Ortel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:21:08 EDT --- Again, thanks for the help. I updated the makefile to publish (scp) the tar.gz files to fedorahosted as suggested and bumped to release (2). -- Configure 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 466737] Review Request: matio - Library for reading/writing Matlab MAT 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=466737 --- Comment #8 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:26:45 EDT --- You need to add %__arch_install_post /usr/lib/rpm/check-rpaths /usr/lib/rpm/check-buildroot in ~/.rpmmacros -- Configure 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 466737] Review Request: matio - Library for reading/writing Matlab MAT 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=466737 --- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:33:23 EDT --- No, rpmbuild does it automatically. At least in F9. -- Configure 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 459924] Review Request: Homestead - 3D real-time network visualiser
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=459924 --- Comment #25 from Simon Wesp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:37:53 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: homestead Short Description: 3D real-time network visualiser Owners: cassmodiah Branches: F-9 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 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 #9 from Sergio Pascual <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:42:05 EDT --- There is a package called game-menus, that create submenus based in subcategories. The puzzles go into 'Logic & Puzzles' By the way, the name of the puzzles should start with a capital letter, following the convention of the rest of the menu entries. -- Configure 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 445970] Review Request: g2ipmsg2 - IP Messenger for GNOME 2
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=445970 --- Comment #6 from ZC Miao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:45:02 EDT --- Updated SPEC: http://linuxfire.com.cn/~hellwolf/software/g2ipmsg/g2ipmsg.spec SRPM: http://linuxfire.com.cn/~hellwolf/software/g2ipmsg/g2ipmsg-0.9.6-1.src.rpm Archive has been released: http://www.ipmsg.org/index.html.en http://www.ipmsg.org/archive/g2ipmsg-0.9.6.tar.gz -- Configure 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 466379] Review Request: zfs-fuse - ZFS ported to Linux FUSE
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=466379 --- Comment #6 from Denis Leroy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:47:08 EDT --- I exchanged emails with Sun's Open Source Community Manager and Sun's Open Source Chief Officer (Simon Phipps). The message I got from them is very clear: - Sun would love to see fuse-zfs being added to the Fedora distribution - There should be *no* legal issues, neither license nor patents related, that should block the review and acceptance of this package in Fedora. To be more precise: 1) There are no license issues between Fuse-ZFS and ZFS itself. http://fuse.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/FAQ#Under_what_conditions_may_I_distribute_a_filesystem_which_uses_libfusex3f 2) Fuse-ZFS has no patent issues in regards to ZFS. Fuse-ZFS is CDDL, and as such receives all the patent protection that CDDL grants. This is explicit in the CDDL license, 2.1.b and 2.2.b (http://www.sun.com/cddl/cddl.html). The patent protection applies to ZFS modifications and derivative works as well. This means that Fuse-ZFS can be modified, can be redistributed, or even forked for that matter. As long as the modifications are made public, just as with the GPL. -- Configure 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 467718] Review Request: rubygem-gruff - Beautiful graphs for one or multiple datasets
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=467718 --- Comment #1 from Darryl L. Pierce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 10:50:49 EDT --- Can I get someone to review this package for 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 225681] Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
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=225681 Ray Strode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||468701 -- Configure 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 468701] New: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468701 Summary: Merge Review: desktop-file-utils Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: redhat-rpm-config AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks: 225681 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #225681 +++ --- Additional comment from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2008-10-17 18:21:06 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=320728) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=320728) file spec patch to implement request of the review Please review and tell me if you want the whole patch to be applied. If yes I'll apply and rebuild, if no, please apply what you want. --- Additional comment from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2008-10-18 00:43:24 EDT --- Everything looks good but removing the .prov file. If you think it should go in redhat-rpm-config or whatever, we should get it there first before taking it out here. --- Additional comment from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on 2008-10-25 09:28:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) > Everything looks good but removing the .prov file. If you think it should go > in redhat-rpm-config or whatever, we should get it there first before taking > it > out here. Please submit it to redhat-rpm-config then, I'd prefer if you do it, since redhat-rpm-config are not very responsive 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 225681] Merge Review: desktop-file-utils
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=225681 --- Comment #15 from Ray Strode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:01:34 EDT --- filed Bug 468701 -- Configure 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 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
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=425882 --- Comment #25 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:07:45 EDT --- Honestly as an FPC member I'm quite interested in actually seeing how the guidelines work for someone who is not familiar with Haskell. Besides, at this point it seems as if you are submitting the package, which would mean that it is quite inappropriate for you to be reviewing it as well. Before progressing, though, the remaining questions in comment #20 need answers. -- Configure 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 457035] Review Request: libproxy - A library handling all the details of proxy configuration
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=457035 --- Comment #17 from Nathaniel McCallum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:29:35 EDT --- Please ignore my packaging nitpicks. Its far more important (to me) that it is packaged than *how* it is packaged. Sorry for slowing up the process. -- Configure 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 468562] Review Request: basket - Taking care of your ideas
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=468562 Christopher D. Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Blocks||177841 Resolution|NOTABUG | --- Comment #3 from Christopher D. Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:27:22 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > Basket is already in Fedora: > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/basket Sorry, I should have been more clear. I submitted this review in response to: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452994. The current package maintainer didn't have time to update to the new release and told me I could do it if I wanted. I'm also seeking sponsorship so I figured it would be good submit another package in additional to my original. -- Configure 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 468562] Review Request: basket - Taking care of your ideas
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=468562 --- Comment #5 from Hans de Goede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:41:15 EDT --- One more note for Christopher, I'm currently rather busy with things to fix before the final F-10 freeze (which is tonight) after that I'll make some time and review both this one and barry, of both reviews go ok (which I assume they will) I'll sponsor you once both packages are in a state where I'm happy to approve 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 468562] Review Request: basket - Taking care of your ideas
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=468562 Hans de Goede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Component|Package Review |basket Blocks|177841 | --- Comment #4 from Hans de Goede <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:39:16 EDT --- Note to others I'm in the process of sponsoring Christopher, also see review bug 467958. Christopher, Ah, ok so this is a Re-Review, in the light of sponsoring you and in the light of the issues you've mentioned I think that is a good idea. It would have been good to mention that with the initial review submission though. So I'll assign this one to me (as your potential sponsor) and change the component to the existing basket as to not confuse all the automated review scripts and searches. -- Configure 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 457035] Review Request: libproxy - A library handling all the details of proxy configuration
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=457035 --- Comment #18 from Rex Dieter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:46:38 EDT --- upstream input, constructive criticism, etc... is always very welcome. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454867] Review Request: kcirbshooter - A small puzzle game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454867 Nils Philippsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235 | -- Configure 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 454867] Review Request: kcirbshooter - A small puzzle game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454867
Nils Philippsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|Review Request: |Review Request:
|brickshooter - A small |kcirbshooter - A small
|puzzle game |puzzle game
Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]
||ightlinux.org)
--- Comment #10 from Nils Philippsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 11:49:02
EDT ---
All this on top of my first review in comment #1.
Bad:
- MUSTFIX: Re-add information about the copyright terms and holder to the
source file (luckily there's only one ;-), i.e. I found the following in the
original source file and leaving it out may technically be a GPL violation:
...
License: GPLv2
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
20080502
...
Possibly just leave the existing top level comment and add yours(*) before that
to be on the safe side.
(*) e.g. "kcirbshooter is a fork of the game found at http://... which was done
to avoid confusion with the original Brickshooter(tm) game" -- Spot, what do
you think?
- MUSTFIX: Don't distribute the compiled executable in the source tarball, it
might use the pre-built binary otherwise.
- MUSTFIX: Use either $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %buildroot consistently, not both.
- MUSTFIX: Use RPM optimization flags. I'll attach a patch which lets you set
them this way:
make OPTFLAGS="%optflags" ${?_smp_mflags}"
- MUSTFIX: correct grammar of description:
"""
Kcirbshooter is a small puzzle game for linux, where you have
to clear the central area from differently colored bricks. Three or
more adjacent bricks of the same color will vanish. You can shoot
bricks into the playing field from the fringes.
"""
Good:
=
- No potential for confusion with original Brickshooter game.
- Owns all directories it creates or depends on packages that contain them.
- Includes license as documentation
- Builds in mock.
--
Configure 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 468562] Review Request: basket - Taking care of your ideas
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=468562 --- Comment #6 from José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 12:05:15 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > Note to others I'm in the process of sponsoring Christopher, also see review > bug 467958. > > Christopher, > > Ah, ok so this is a Re-Review, in the light of sponsoring you and in the light > of the issues you've mentioned I think that is a good idea. It would have been > good to mention that with the initial review submission though. Yes. :-) I would not have closed it if I knew the reasons for the re-review. A small note at begin it is enough. > So I'll assign this one to me (as your potential sponsor) and change the > component to the existing basket as to not confuse all the automated review > scripts and searches. Now, if I may add a note about the description: I don't like the second sentence in description: "Organizing your notes has never been so easy." I think it adds nothing useful to the description, even if I use just basket to take notes on computer. I understand that the description comes mostly from the package documentation and webpage but as packager we should strive to make the description mostly objective. This is not a blocker (if it were I would have to review all my packages descriptions before ;-) ) but it is something for you to consider (a nitpick). -- Configure 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 245688] Review Request: python-pywbem - Python WBEM client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=245688 --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 12:49:25 EDT --- 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 287191] Review Request: mod_auth_cas - Apache authentication for the CAS Single Sign-On service
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=287191 Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks|177841 |201449 Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 12:51:39 EDT --- Well, it's been another week with no response. I guess I'll close 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 428435] Review Request: shezhu - Shezhu Resource Sharing System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428435 Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks|177841 |201449 Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 12:53:10 EDT --- And its been another week; I guess I'll close 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 427706] Review Request: python-urwid - console user interface for python
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=427706 --- Comment #15 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 12:52:19 EDT --- Any response to the above commentary? -- Configure 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 467260] Review Request: mingw32-filesystem - MinGW base filesystem and environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467260 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 13:40:07 EDT --- Honestly, the last two paragraphs above the footnote were sufficient. But this needs to get into the actual spec, so that people who ask this question later can look at the package and understand what's going on. Were the spec commented to add that, I see no reason that I wouldn't approve 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 466379] Review Request: zfs-fuse - ZFS ported to Linux FUSE
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=466379 Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235 | --- Comment #7 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 13:39:45 EDT --- CDDL as a patent grant is fine. Lifting FE-Legal. -- Configure 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 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633 --- Comment #2 from Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 13:45:57 EDT --- please look again http://ispbrasil.com.br/wput/wput.spec http://ispbrasil.com.br/wput/wput-0.6.1-2.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 454867] Review Request: kcirbshooter - A small puzzle game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454867 --- Comment #11 from Tom "spot" Callaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 13:47:16 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) > (*) e.g. "kcirbshooter is a fork of the game found at http://... which was > done > to avoid confusion with the original Brickshooter(tm) game" -- Spot, what do > you think? Sure, that should be within the realm of fair use. ~spot -- Configure 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 454867] Review Request: kcirbshooter - A small puzzle game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454867 --- Comment #12 from Nils Philippsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 13:54:32 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=321634) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=321634) Patch which allows setting of OPTFLAGS for the Makefile -- Configure 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 457035] Review Request: libproxy - A library handling all the details of proxy configuration
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=457035 --- Comment #19 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 13:58:05 EDT --- @Nathaniel Indeed, I would say even that: your advices are not only welcomed, but they are really needed to define with you an sharp way to package libproxy. So this is an exchange in two ways And without your advices, there is low chance that the package will be provided within fedora. Also, I hope that this talk doesn't only serve Fedora. I've for example requested the OpenSUSE packager for advices, and I know he's following. So according to the quick advices received from the kde team. It is better to link directly to libproxy library. So I guess to use this spec solely. Now I just wonder if libproxy will be useable as is , since it will lack the related modules from within libproxy along with lack of support from the related components (control-center, neon, NetworkManager, xulrunner,yum , pirut etc), At least for our configuration tools in F-10. So for the long plan. I expect there is a need for a feature request to have most "internet application" to be converted/tested to libproxy support/compliance. Spec URL: http://kwizart.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/libproxy.spec SRPM URL: http://kwizart.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/libproxy-0.2.3-7.fc8.kwizart.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 466737] Review Request: matio - Library for reading/writing Matlab MAT 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=466737 --- Comment #10 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 14:04:36 EDT --- so what output rpmlint on installed 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 467260] Review Request: mingw32-filesystem - MinGW base filesystem and environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467260 --- Comment #7 from Richard W.M. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 14:07:58 EDT --- I hope I've understood your request correctly ... SRPM: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/mingw32-filesystem-31-1.fc10.src.rpm Spec: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/mingw32-filesystem.spec * Mon Oct 27 2008 Richard Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 31-1 - Update the spec file with explanation of the 'Provides: mingw32(...)' lines for Windows system DLLs. -- Configure 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 468643] Review Request: perl-Devel-GlobalDestruction - Expose PL_dirty
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=468643 Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 15:26:42 EDT --- While the %description seems to make sense, Summary: is, well, not terribly helpful. Is anyone supposed to know what PL_dirty is? Could we at least use what upstream has: Expose PL_dirty, the flag which marks global destruction or maybe just Expose the flag which marks global destruction which, while still not completely comprehensible to most folks, is at least understandable by most moderately experienced Perl programmers. Anyway, full review forthcoming. -- Configure 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 438406] Review Request: ufiformat - Disk formatting utility for USB floppy devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438406 Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 15:31:36 EDT --- Hmm, this seems to have fallen through the cracks. It looks like someone came along and added some needless bug alias which advanced the "last changed" date and made the ticket drop off of my "old tickets to look at" report. Oh, well. Anyway, Chris, did you still want to get this in? Could you post a link to your latest 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 468753] New: Review Request: nss-myhostname - glibc plugin for local system host name resolution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: nss-myhostname - glibc plugin for local system host name resolution https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468753 Summary: Review Request: nss-myhostname - glibc plugin for local system host name resolution 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://0pointer.de/public/nss-myhostname.spec SRPM URL: http://0pointer.de/public/nss-myhostname-0.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: nss-myhostname is a plugin for the GNU Name Service Switch (NSS) functionality of the GNU C Library (glibc) providing host name resolution for the locally configured system hostname as returned by gethostname(2). A lot of software relies on that the local host name is resolvable via DNS to an IPv4 or IPv6 address. When using dynamic hostnames this is usually achieved by patching /etc/hosts which however is suboptimal since it requires a writable /etc file system and is fragile because the file might also be edited by the administrator. nss-myhostname simply returns the IPv4 address 127.0.0.2 (wich is on the local loopback) and the IPv6 address ::1 (which is the local host) for whatever system hostname is configured locally. Patching /etc/hostname is thus no longer necessary. --- When we make the system host name a bit more more dynamic this should allow us to still guarantee that the hostname stays resolvable under all circumstances without having to rewrite /etc/hosts all the time. -- Configure 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 466737] Review Request: matio - Library for reading/writing Matlab MAT 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=466737 --- Comment #11 from Jussi Lehtola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 14:45:19 EDT --- Clean. -- Configure 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 435015] Review Request: gpp4 - LGPL CCP4 library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435015 --- Comment #17 from Tim Fenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 16:29:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) > Some notes > > ? License > - License tag can be okay with LGPLv2 as README file > declares so, however all files under src/ directories > are actually under LGPLv2+. > Would you ask upstream about this? (as it is okay > with LGPLv2, this is not a blocker) > Will do - will report back on this asap. > * Source tarball > - The tarball in the srpm differs from what I could > download from the URL written as %SOURCE > -- > 514623 2008-06-10 05:21 gpp4-1.0.4-9.fc10.src/gpp4-1.0.4.tar.gz > 498933 2007-09-03 00:00 orig/gpp4-1.0.4.tar.gz > > 48931781425a5b79a8255ebefaed24b3 orig/gpp4-1.0.4.tar.gz > 7494566588545eb167b1c4c6e486cdf4 gpp4-1.0.4-9.fc10.src/gpp4-1.0.4.tar.gz > -- > ah, stupid mistake on my part (was using a .tar.gz from a "make build"). Fixed. > * Linkage error > - rpmlint shows > -- > gpp4.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgpp4.so.0.0.0 sincos > gpp4.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgpp4.so.0.0.0 sqrt > gpp4.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgpp4.so.0.0.0 rintf > gpp4.i386: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib/libgpp4.so.0.0.0 lrint > -- > For packages providing -devel subpackage these rpmlint warnings > cannot be allowed because these will cause linkage error when > using these libraries. > I guess linking to libm.so (-lm) will remove these warnings. > Fixed. > > * Duplicate documents > - Generally there is no need to include a document file as %doc > to both main and -devel packages. > Fixed. > * Timestamps > -- > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install='install -p' > -- > - This should be "INSTALL='install -p'". > Fixed. > ? Another rpmlint issue > -- > gpp4-devel.i386: W: file-not-utf8 > /usr/share/doc/gpp4-devel-1.0.4/doc/latex/csym_f_page.tex > -- > - Well it may be preferable to convert this file to UTF-8, > however I am not sure if tex supports UTF-8 tex file > (at least it is well-known that platex does not support > Japanese UTF-8 tex files...) >From my experience with latex, a package has to be added to the document (utf8) in order for latex to understand it. new spec: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/gpp4.spec updated srpm: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/gpp4-1.0.4-10.f8.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 435016] Review Request: mmdb - MMDB coordinate library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435016 Tim Fenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454867] Review Request: kcirbshooter - A small puzzle game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454867 Stefan Posdzich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |ightlinux.org) | --- Comment #13 from Stefan Posdzich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 14:49:50 EDT --- Hope all "problems" are fixed now! Spec: http://cheekyboinc.spielen-unter-linux.de/kcirbshooter.spec SRPM: http://cheekyboinc.spielen-unter-linux.de/kcirbshooter-0.04-2.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 435016] Review Request: mmdb - MMDB coordinate library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435016 --- Comment #21 from Tim Fenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 16:35:01 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mmdb Short Description: macromolecular coordinate library Owners: timfenn Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-5 InitialCC: timfenn -- Configure 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 #44 from Tim Fenn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 16:31:50 EDT --- submitted to F-9 as a newpackage request. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pmw-1.3.2-5.fc9,pymol-1.1-10.20081015svn3468.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 441378] Review Request: smokeping - Latency Logging and Graphing System
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441378 Terje Røsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #36 from Terje Røsten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 16:50:03 EDT --- Imported and built. -- Configure 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 466737] Review Request: matio - Library for reading/writing Matlab MAT 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=466737 --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 16:47:36 EDT --- Well actually i was wrong. the rpath is in the test binary packages. So there is many ways to remove rpathes, it depends on the cause. In the F-8 x86 _64 case, there is a rpath defined which is removed if the configure script is regenerated or libtool patched. so either one or the others options works, and both fixes are valid (even if they is no rpath after all). There is a typo on the group for the test package, i plan to change it to Development/Tools -- Configure 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 468765] Review Request: hydrogen-drumkits - Additional DrumKits for Hydrogen
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=468765 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235 -- Configure 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 468765] New: Review Request: hydrogen-drumkits - Additional DrumKits for Hydrogen
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: hydrogen-drumkits - Additional DrumKits for Hydrogen https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468765 Summary: Review Request: hydrogen-drumkits - Additional DrumKits for Hydrogen 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://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/hydrogen-drumkits.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/hydrogen-drumkits-0-0.20080907.1.fc9.src.rpm Description: A collection of additional drumkits for the Hydrogen advanced drum machine for GNU/Linux. Notes: Hydrogen website provides a large collection of drumkits. However, most of these drumkits are licenseless. In this SRPM, I only included a subset which contains drumkits licensed under either GPL or LinuxTag Green OpenMusic License. The latter is not among the "Good Licenses" list in the guidelines hence I am blocking FE-Legal. The full text of this license can be found in the SRPM, and also at http://openmusic.linuxtag.org/green.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633 --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:17:02 EDT --- If this is your first package you need to seek a sponsor. I can't sponsor you but I can do the review. Please visit the following pages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Create_Your_Review_Request (-> FE-NEEDSPONSOR ;-) ) -- Configure 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 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633
--- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:30:11
EDT ---
Again some comments on your spec file
- Source:
- Please use 'Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz' instead of
a link to a mirror
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net
- Patch1: wput-destdir.patch
- The first patch is 'Patch0'
- %changelog
- To every release bump belongs an changelog entry.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs
--
Configure 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 468562] Review Request: basket - Taking care of your ideas
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=468562 Christopher D. Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- Comment #7 from Christopher D. Stover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:34:38 EDT --- Thanks Hans, and yes, I should have mentioned the re-review in my first comment but didn't think to. Sorry to throw you off as well José. José -- I agree with you about the description. What do you think about: "A multi-purpose note-taking application that makes it easy to write down ideas as you think, and quickly find them later. You can collect, import or share any data, tag your notes and secure it some or all of it with passwords and/or encryption." -- Configure 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 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:32:42 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > (-> FE-NEEDSPONSOR ;-) ) Forget this...you added the blocker already. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457955] Review Request: bonvenocf-fonts - BonvenoCF 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=457955 Nicolas Mailhot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||o.co.in) --- Comment #6 from Nicolas Mailhot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:42:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > I dint know how to tackle point 8 9 10 > > I dont think i know enough for sposnorship yet. Ankur, there's no need to rush, and we'll do it as slowly as you're comfortable with. Baby steps are good. If my requests are difficult to understand there's no shame at all asking for clarifications on the list. Someone else may answer using different words than mine and anyway that creates some on-line documentation for others new packagers (the list is international so no one will object if you have some problems with the pidgin English I use) Likewise, if you find some part of the wiki documentation obscure, just ask for help on the list, and propose a re-wording after you've understood the point. That's another great way to understand packaging and getting sponsored. If you're a bit intimidated by a public mailing list you can exchange private mails with Martin-Gomez Pablo or try to meet in an irc channel. He's also a novice packager, even if he's got a little more experience than you, so you may be a bit more comfortable exchanging tips with him. That being said: You still need to work on 14 8 9 10. Since you've written you've taken care of 8 9 10, you may have uploaded the wrong package version (or I can elaborate if you don't understand those points) 15. Also, you need to Buildrequire fontforge if you use it, otherwise the package won't build in koji or mock. Since you're not sponsored yet you can't test in koji so I strongly suggest installing mock on your system (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Projects/Mock) It's a great packager helper. 16. running rpmlint on the result produces those warnings cf-bonveno-fonts.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1/COPYING cf-bonveno-fonts.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/cf-bonveno-fonts-1.1/README To fix this warning you need something like for txt in COPYING README ; do sed 's/\r//' $txt > $txt.new touch -r $txt $txt.new mv $txt.new $txt done (the touch is necessary so you don't end up with new doc timestamps after each builds) You have more complete examples of txt files fixing in the gfs font packages. Just browse some specs there http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/ Mostly, we want new packagers to understand why their spec files contain X or Y, not just copy templates blindly, so please DO ask every time you feel you're performing black magic. -- Configure 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 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633 --- Comment #6 from Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:49:09 EDT --- fixed Can I start bumping versions later ? http://ispbrasil.com.br/wput/wput.spec http://ispbrasil.com.br/wput/wput-0.6.1-3.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 466496] Review Request: python-suds - A lightweight python soap web services client
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=466496 --- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:48:01 EDT --- You released a new version, .0.3.2 . This is a good point in time to bump the release of you spec file. After every change on your spec file you should bump the release. (-> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Changelogs ) I think that '--record=INSTALLED_FILES' is no longer needed because you are using 'globs' in the %files section now. I was able to build your packages but rpmlint complains... Source RPM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint -i python-suds* python-suds.src: E: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install You should clean $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in the %clean section and just after the beginning of %install section. Use "rm -Rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT". 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. RPM: [EMAIL PROTECTED] noarch]$ rpmlint -i python-suds* python-suds.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.3.1-1 0.3.1-2.fc9 The last entry in %changelog contains a version identifier that is not coherent with the epoch:version-release tuple of the package. 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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 #13 from Nicolas Mailhot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:54:10 EDT --- This one is much nicer but you need to work on renaming the font at build time inside the sfds and also to work on the fontconfig rules. Please take some time with Pablo on those. Also it needs the same doc fix as bonveno. -- Configure 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 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633 --- Comment #7 from manuel wolfshant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 17:57:58 EDT --- > The first patch is 'Patch0' Just for the record: that's more a cosmetic / pedantic problem. rpm is very happy to use anything, as long as the definition of the patch (the PatchN line) and it's usage (the %PatchN line) correspond. But yes, for a first submission looking nice (from a cosmetic point of view) is important and could be a decision factor. More important: please preserve the older changelog entries when you/add make changes and create new releases of the spec. I am looking at releases 2 and 3 right now and I would have liked to know what was changed compared to the first ones. Especially as the _current_ changelog (the one from release 3) still says "Initial package." A correct changelog would have probably had something along: * Thu Oct 27 2008 Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.6.1-3 - start counting patches from 0 * Thu Oct 27 2008 Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.6.1-2 - fixes %%files, consistent use of macros<, other relevant changes, if any> * Thu Oct 26 2008 Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.6.1-1.0 - Initial 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 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 #10 from Victor Bogado <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 18:08:25 EDT --- Damn I am distracted, I was sure that I had done everything, and ended up forgetting the most important point. :P I made the changes, and putted on the same bat-site. http://bogado.net/rpm/puzzles-8200-3.bog9.src.rpm http://bogado.net/rpm/puzzles.spec I installed the games-menus and it is good. I was thinking if the package could be divided into several sub packages, one for each game and a master-package that could install all the mini-games, the only problem is that I don't know how to create the sub-packages based on what binaries the compilation produces. -- Configure 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 468633] Review Request: wput - A utility for uploading files or whole directories to remote ftp-servers
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=468633 --- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 18:13:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > Can I start bumping versions later ? I'm not talking about the version of the source. The 'Release' is for the spec file. Again changelog...in your lasted spec file is only *ONE* changelog entry. If your Release is '3' there have to be '3' entries. Your spec file should contain. For the reviewers it's much easier to keep track of the changes. %changelog * Mon Oct 27 2008 Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.6.1-3 - Fix Source0 - Rename Patch1 to Patch0 * Mon Oct 27 2008 Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.6.1-2 - Changes acc. #468633 Comment #1 * Thu Oct 26 2008 Itamar Reis Peixoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - 0.6.1-1 - Initial 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 459878] Review Request: genome - Package for the Genome Project
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=459878 Jeroen van Meeuwen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? | --- Comment #14 from Jeroen van Meeuwen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 18:19:16 EDT --- Cancel fedora-cvs request flag -- Configure 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 459878] Review Request: genome - Package for the Genome Project
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=459878 Jeroen van Meeuwen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] ||okyo.ac.jp) --- Comment #13 from Jeroen van Meeuwen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 18:18:36 EDT --- Is there any specific issue you can show me that needs to be addressed as a reason for you to have this package re-reviewed? That could help me in getting the package better beforehand. -- Configure 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 429882] Review Request: python-Levenshtein - Levenshtein distance measurement library in C
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=429882 --- Comment #17 from Jason Tibbitts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 18:22:41 EDT --- Did you ever get your account set up? I don't see any names matching yours in the system. I'm going to be on vacation for a bit starting later this week, so if you want to get this set up before I go, please do the setup on your side soon. If you need help with this, just let me know. -- Configure 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 425882] Review Request: ghc-zlib - zlib bindings for ghc
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=425882 --- Comment #26 from Bryan O'Sullivan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2008-10-27 18:27:01 EDT --- Re comment #20: > If you build a package against ghc-zlib, will it be required at runtime? No. These Haskell packages are essentially devel packages. > There's no reason to include the LICENSE file twice, is there? No. If that's happening, it's a mistake. -- Configure 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
