[Bug 464781] Review Request: flexdock - Java docking UI element. First package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464781 --- Comment #13 from D Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 02:07:07 EDT --- I have uploaded the new spec src rpm. Now pending upon deps. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469473] New: Review Request: axel - A lightweight download accelerator by using multiple connections
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: axel - A lightweight download accelerator by using multiple connections https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469473 Summary: Review Request: axel - A lightweight download accelerator by using multiple connections 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://gcell.fedorapeople.org/axel.spec SRPM URL: http://gcell.fedorapeople.org/axel-2.2-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Axel tries to accelerate HTTP/FTP downloading process by using multiple connections for one file. It can use multiple mirrors for a download. Axel has no dependencies and is lightweight, so it might be useful as a wget clone on byte-critical systems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461407] Review Request: laf-plugin - Generic plugin framework for Java look-and-feels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461407 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 02:46:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) Do we need the javadoc? Not necessary (if you think so) There has just recently been a new version released though. Okay, then please upgrade. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454980] Review Request: axel - Download accelerator, wget replacement
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454980 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #24 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 02:51:28 EDT --- *** Bug 469473 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469473] Review Request: axel - A lightweight download accelerator by using multiple connections
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469473 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 02:51:27 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 454980 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458359] Review Request: gpscorrelate - A GPS photo correlation / geotagging 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=458359
--- Comment #7 from Till Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 03:13:55 EDT ---
The patches were accepted by upstream and here is my request for a logo from
the Fedora Artwork team:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Artwork/DesignService#GPScorrelate_application
Not using %{name} in Source0 is kind of intentional, because I do not see any
added value to use it and afaik it is not required by the source URL
guidelines.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469474] New: Review Request: sovix - A website revision system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sovix - A website revision system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469474 Summary: Review Request: sovix - A website revision system 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://bonii.fedorapeople.org/spec/sovix.spec SRPM URL: http://bonii.fedorapeople.org/srpms/sovix-0.0.1.6-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: GNU Sovix is the PHP-based, extensible, customizable, semantic website revision system.If this seems to be a bit of a mouthful, an easier explanation is Sovix is a free Emacs-like WRS, the text editor Sovix was developed in. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461407] Review Request: laf-plugin - Generic plugin framework for Java look-and-feels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461407 --- Comment #4 from D Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 03:49:17 EDT --- OK looked at the project a bit more -- couldn't see any real changes, other than datestamps on their build. Anyway, the re-built srpm spec file are available. Simon Wesp: I hope you don't mind me hosting your work -- let me know if you are going to maintain -- I am assuming not due to wontfix tag. Spec URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/laf-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/laf-plugin-1.0-1.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 469470] Review Request: mz - A fast versatile packet generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469470 --- Comment #2 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 04:52:19 EDT --- I am quite sure that trying to install the binary under the name mz will meet reluctance. How about renaming it to mausezahn ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467001] Review Request: litmus - WebDAV Test Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467001 --- Comment #6 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 05:55:55 EDT --- Hi, your comments in changelog for versions 0.12-1 and 1.12-2 are the same. Also, I think that BuildRequires: autoconf automake is not necessary. Authough there is an autogen.sh in the source, it is not used. I tried building litmus with these options %configure --with-ssl \ --with-expat \ --with-included-neon \ --enable-threadsafe-ssl=posix and BuildRequires: expat-devel BuildRequires: neon-devel BuildRequires: openssl-devel and got Install prefix: /usr Compiler:gcc neon library:included libneon (0.28.3) XML parser: expat SSL library: SSL support enabled, using OpenSSL (0.9.7 or later) Therefore, the bundled neon version is 0.28.3 (the same of F9), but higher than F8 (0.27.2). It also uses the external expat in this case. As a consequence, building for F8 is better this way, if you intend to do that. But this is just a suggestion, because using the bundled neon, seems also to force the use of the external expat and openssl. Otherwise, it uses whatever neon uses. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469470] Review Request: mz - A fast versatile packet generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469470 --- Comment #3 from vivek shah [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 07:36:43 EDT --- As far as Package Naming guidelines are concerned the package name must match the upstream tarball and be consistent with the name in case it is packaged under different distros in case another package with the same name does not(which does not exist as of now even in the Review queues). This software exists in Debian under the name 'mz' so I feel it is reasonable to continue with the package name 'mz'. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469114] Review Request: hunspell-mn - Mongolian hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469114 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 07:59:26 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hunspell-mn Short Description: Mongolian hunspell dictionary Owners: caolanm Branches: 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 467182] Review Request: hunspell-sc - Sardinian hunspell dictionary
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467182 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 07:58:58 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hunspell-sc Short Description: Sardinian hunspell dictionary Owners: caolanm Branches: 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 467398] Review Request: mingw32-gettext - GNU libraries and utilities for producing multi-lingual messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467398 --- Comment #13 from Richard W.M. Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 08:22:16 EDT --- The mailing list has 7 subscribers at the moment (including me). Not bad for an ML which has only been open for 5 days :-) I see that you are subscribed, so you should be able to post. If you have any problems 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 456892] Review Request: aget - multi-threaded download accelerator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456892 --- Comment #12 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 08:25:49 EDT --- aget is orphaned , also aget is a dead project, there are no one working in it(no developers) I don't have tried axel, but seems to do the same thing. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454980 I don't know if is a good idea to include aget again in fedora. but if you want to do this go ahead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467398] Review Request: mingw32-gettext - GNU libraries and utilities for producing multi-lingual messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467398 --- Comment #12 from Levente Farkas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 08:15:37 EDT --- Richard are you one the mailing list too? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461077] Review Request: nxtvepg - A nexTView EPG decoder and browser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461077 --- Comment #17 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 08:33:47 EDT --- First of all: (In reply to comment #16) SRPM URL: http://www.torsten.rausche.net/fedora/review/nxtvepg/nxtvepg-2.8.1-1.fc9.src.rpm - I must say this srpm (tarball in this srpm) is problematic. Almost all codes in 2.8.1 tarball are still under GPLv2 (strict), however newly added tv_grab_ttx.pl is under GPLv3+, which are, unfortunately, incompatible: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#GPL_Compatibility_Matrix You need to fix license issue first. (In reply to comment #16) How much time will it cost then to do the same with a foreign package? I guess you will take much less time than the package you develop by yourself and release by yourself. Do I have to check every single point in that pre-reviews to get them honored? I don't know what you mean by single point, however please check at least what is written on ReviewGuidelines and Guidelines wiki How many pre-reviews will I have to do? At least one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464047] Review Request for libprojectM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464047 --- Comment #11 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 08:40:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) Update SPEC in the same location, and new SRPM: http://www.vtscrew.com/libprojectM-1.2.0-4.fc9.src.rpm Seems 404... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461407] Review Request: laf-plugin - Generic plugin framework for Java look-and-feels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461407 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469471] Review Request: skinlf - Java look and feel for swing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469471 Bug 469471 depends on bug 461407, which changed state. Bug 461407 Summary: Review Request: laf-plugin - Generic plugin framework for Java look-and-feels https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461407 What|Old Value |New Value Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461407] Review Request: laf-plugin - Generic plugin framework for Java look-and-feels
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461407 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | --- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 08:43:03 EDT --- (Reopening) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467409] Review Request: mingw32-atk - MinGW Windows Atk 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=467409
Levente Farkas [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Levente Farkas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 09:09:16 EDT
---
please apply this patch for require versioned native packages:
--- ./mingw32-atk.spec.lfarkas 2008-11-01 13:50:38.0 +0100
+++ ./mingw32-atk.spec 2008-11-01 14:08:33.0 +0100
@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
%define __find_requires %{_mingw32_findrequires}
%define __find_provides %{_mingw32_findprovides}
+%define glib2_version 2.6.0
+
Name: mingw32-atk
Version:1.24.0
Release:2%{?dist}
@@ -27,7 +29,7 @@ BuildRequires: pkgconfig
# Need native one too for msgfmt
BuildRequires: gettext
# Need native one too for glib-genmarshal
-BuildRequires: glib2-devel
+BuildRequires: glib2-devel = %{glib2_version}
%description
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467402] Review Request: mingw32-glib2 - MinGW Windows GLib2 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=467402
Levente Farkas [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Levente Farkas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 09:13:08 EDT
---
please apply this patch
diff -up ./mingw32-glib2.spec.lfarkas ./mingw32-glib2.spec
--- ./mingw32-glib2.spec.lfarkas 2008-11-01 14:10:12.0 +0100
+++ ./mingw32-glib2.spec 2008-11-01 14:12:21.0 +0100
@@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ BuildRequires: pkgconfig
# Native version required for msgfmt use in build
BuildRequires: gettext
# Native version required for glib-genmarshal
-BuildRequires: glib2-devel
+BuildRequires: glib2-devel = %{version}
%description
MinGW Windows Glib2 library.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467420] Review Request: mingw32-gtk2 - MinGW Windows Gtk2 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=467420
Levente Farkas [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #2 from Levente Farkas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 09:14:50 EDT
---
please apply:
diff -up ./mingw32-gtk2.spec.lfarkas ./mingw32-gtk2.spec
--- ./mingw32-gtk2.spec.lfarkas 2008-11-01 14:13:22.0 +0100
+++ ./mingw32-gtk2.spec 2008-11-01 14:14:14.0 +0100
@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
%define __find_requires %{_mingw32_findrequires}
%define __find_provides %{_mingw32_findprovides}
+%define glib2_version 2.6.0
+
Name: mingw32-gtk2
Version:2.14.4
Release:3%{?dist}
@@ -38,11 +40,11 @@ BuildRequires: pkgconfig
# Native one for msgfmt
BuildRequires: gettext
# Native one for glib-genmarsjal
-BuildRequires: glib2-devel
+BuildRequires: glib2-devel = %{glib2_version}
# Native one for gtk-update-icon-cache
-BuildRequires: gtk2
+BuildRequires: gtk2 = %{version}
# Native one for gdk-pixbuf-csource
-BuildRequires: gtk2-devel
+BuildRequires: gtk2-devel = %{version}
%description
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469485] New: Review Request: fakeap - Fake Access Points generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: fakeap - Fake Access Points generator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469485 Summary: Review Request: fakeap - Fake Access Points generator 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://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/fakeap.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/fakeap-0.3.2-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.blackalchemy.to/project/fakeap/ Description: FakeAP generates thousands of counterfeit 802.11b access points. Hide in plain sight amongst Fake AP's cacophony of beacon frames. As part of a honeypot or as an instrument of your site security plan, Fake AP confuses Wardrivers, NetStumblers, Script Kiddies, and other undesirables. Koji scratch build: F9: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=914135 F10: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=914133 RPM rpmlint output: [EMAIL PROTECTED] noarch]$ rpmlint -i fake* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. SRPM rpmlint output: [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint -i fakeap* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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 459088] Review Request: protobuf - Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459088
--- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 09:22:35 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #23)
(In reply to comment #21)
* Shipping -static subpackage
- Please explain why this package is needed where -devel
subpackage is provided which includes .so symlink libraries.
Usually static archives must be removed unless
the package does not provide shared libraries.
There are
some cases when you need static libraries,
Unless you provide the concrete case for this package I strongly
disagree (packaging guidelines say that the compelling reason
must be provided)
(If you still want I probably have to ask for FESCo:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Staticly_Linking_Executables
)
and for these cases having
static libraries packaged saves you from rebuilding the required
libraries yourself.
This is exactly why we think we must _not_ provide static archives unless
avoided.
Using static archives will cause problem when some security
issues or so are found in protobuf and people forget that they are
using old static protobuf archive, for example.
!!For -vim subpackage
! Neither of %_datadir/vim/vimfiles/{ftdetect,syntax} are owned
by any packages, however I will ask vim maintainer about this.
Any news on this item?
Oops, completely forgotton, I will surely ask later...
--
Additional remark about python subpackage:
The -python subpackage should not depend on the base package or any other
packages because it is a pure python implementation.
--
- Well, for technical discussion, does this mean that there will
be no problem even if the installed version of protobuf and
protobuf-python differ? (if you don't write Requires this
can happen).
This discussion can be applied for -java subpackage.
From my point of view, the only possible problem is that someone can
finish using newer protobuf-compiler with older python/java
bindings. Both java and python implementations are usable as a runtime
without any C++ code, you only need corresponding version of
protobuf-compiler for development.
Then you should ensure that the trouble you mentioned here won't happen.
* One method is to make -compiler subpackage have:
-
Conflicts: %{name}-java %{version}
Conflicts: %{name}-java %{version}
-
or so.
* For -java subpackage
- About BuildRequires: java-devel = 1.6.0
-- If this means that Java binding needs OpenJDK to
build, then this line must be
BuildRequires: java-devel = 1:1.6.0
java-devel vitrual Provides by java-1.6.0-openjdk-devel
has Epoch 1 for historical reason (see:
I can successfully build the package with
java-1.6.0-sun-devel-1.6.0.3-1jpp without mock on my system, and
BuildRequires: java-devel = 1.6 brings
java-1.7.0-icedtea-devel-1.7.0.0-0.19.b21.snapshot.fc8.i586 which
builds the package succesfully.
Well, actually I don't care about RHEL4, however for this case
I can allow java-devel 1.6.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468462] Review Request: sbackup - Simple Backup Suite for desktop use
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468462 --- Comment #1 from Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 09:39:14 EDT --- Spec URL: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/sbackup-0.10.5/sbackup.spec SRPM URL: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/sbackup-0.10.5/sbackup-0.10.5-2.fc10.src.rpm I think this would be a good package for EPEL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457109] Review-Request: perl-TAP-Harness-JUnit - Generate JUnit compatible output from TAP results
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457109 Marek Mahut [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Marek Mahut [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 09:43:02 EDT --- Package looks sane. + source files match upstream: bdf902ea7a92272def706871a6c1bd5e TAP-Harness-JUnit-0.01.tar.gz + package meets naming and versioning guidelines. + dist tag is present + build root is correct + license is ok + latest version is being packaged + package builds in mock (f8, devel) + rpmlint is silent APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468517] Review Request: saoimage - Utility for displaying astronomical images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468517 Marek Mahut [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Marek Mahut [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 10:15:36 EDT --- Thank you for the package. The package looks sane, please take into consideration Mamoru's comment and fix small cosmetic issue around desktop file and this package is APPROVED. ./saoimage.desktop: warning: key Encoding in group Desktop Entry is deprecated -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459088] Review Request: protobuf - Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459088 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||469491 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||469492 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469492] Review Request: bam - A fast and flexible build 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=469492 Simon Wesp [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||462181 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469492] New: Review Request: bam - A fast and flexible build system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: bam - A fast and flexible build system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469492 Summary: Review Request: bam - A fast and flexible build system 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://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/bam-0.0.0.for.teeworlds.0.4.3/bam.spec SRPM URL: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/bam-0.0.0.for.teeworlds.0.4.3/bam-0.0.0.for.teeworlds.0.4.3-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: the bam build system for teeworlds -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469273] Review Request: QuickFIX - development library for FIX based applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469273 Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] Depends on||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 469273] Review Request: QuickFIX - development library for FIX based applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469273 --- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 10:37:19 EDT --- the first thing to be checked before continue. is the license compatible with fedora ? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468597] Review Request: rubygem-ferret - Full-featured text search engine 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=468597 --- Comment #29 from Jeroen van Meeuwen [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 10:49:19 EDT --- I'll leave this as-it-is then. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469494] New: Review Request: xlcrack - Recover lost and forgotten passwords from XLS files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xlcrack - Recover lost and forgotten passwords from XLS files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469494 Summary: Review Request: xlcrack - Recover lost and forgotten passwords from XLS files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/xlcrack.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/xlcrack-1.2-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://devel.tlrmx.org/misc/ Description: xlcrack recovers lost passwords for XLS files, such as those saved by Excel 95. In order to do this it implements a simple XOR encryption algorithm common to several Microsoft Office applications. Koji scratch builds: F9: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=914172 F10: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=914177 rpmlint output: [EMAIL PROTECTED] i386]$ rpmlint -i xl* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint -i xl* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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 469291] Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01
11:10:28 EDT ---
- 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
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469474] Review Request: sovix - A website revision 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=469474
Fabian Affolter [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 11:18:52
EDT ---
Just some small comments on your spec file
- URL: http://gnu.org/software/%{name}
- This is not wrong, just not so handy - copy--paste is not possible
- $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot}
- This is only cosmetically. It will look nicer if you are using just one
style of those macros.
- %define _enable_debug_package 0
- There is no need for this because the package is 'noarch'
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469291] Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291 --- Comment #2 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 11:18:04 EDT --- what`s the lasted version ? http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/uml_utilities_20070815.tar.bz2 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469273] Review Request: QuickFIX - development library for FIX based applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469273 --- Comment #2 from Hayden James [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 11:34:21 EDT --- Here's the licensing information: http://www.quickfixengine.org/quickfix/doc/html/license.html I'll post to [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 469273] Review Request: QuickFIX - development library for FIX based applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469273 --- Comment #3 from Hayden James [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 11:38:19 EDT --- Actually, looks like you beat me to the punch. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459088] Review Request: protobuf - Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459088
--- Comment #26 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 11:44:08 EDT
---
Well, for -2:
* License
- Well protobuf.pc.in is still under ASL 2.0
You should ask the author to change the license
of this file
(well, actually I have no idea why this pkgconfig
file has license term, first of all...)
Fortunately currently the author is in CC list
of this bug. Rick, would you agree to change .pc.in
file you wrote to be under BSD or to remove license
term completely?
* BuildRequires
- This package won't build without
BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel (note: here
I don't say about Requires).
* Requires
- Requires: %{name}-java-%{version}-%{release} should be
Requires: %{name}-java = %{version}-%{release}
* rpmlint issue
** non-standard-group
- Group Development/Documentation should simply be
Documentation.
** non-executable-script
E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/google/protobuf/descriptor_pb2.py 0644
- If this script are not meant to be executed by user directly,
then this script must not have shebang (anyway the shebang
#!/usr/bin/python2.4 is wrong because we use python 2.5)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459010] Review request: pystatgrab - Python bindings for libstatgrab
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459010 --- Comment #9 from Soumya Kanti Chakraborty [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 12:01:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) Okay, thank you for reply. I already have applied for the Fedora Packager CVS Commit Group. I have requested for the Sponsorship and my FAS name is soumya. Mamoru tell me if you need something more to be done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459010] Review request: pystatgrab - Python bindings for libstatgrab
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459010 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 12:06:29 EDT --- Okay, now I am sponsoring you. Please follow Join wiki again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457926] Review Request: python-wikimarkup - Python module to format text to Mediawiki syntax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457926 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | --- Comment #17 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 12:07:16 EDT --- (Removing 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 469291] Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #3 from Paul Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 12:22:52 EDT
---
Thanks for the pointers. The download sites are a complete mess. I hadn't even
noticed there was a newer version until you pointed it out. It is only directly
linked and not accessable via the sf.net downloads pages.
Spec URL: ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities.spec
SRPM URL:
ftp://ftp.openswan.org/uml_utilities/uml_utilities-20070815-1.fc9.src.rpm
* Sat Nov 1 2008 Paul Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 20070815-1
- Was pointed to newer version of source at obscured location
- Hack out hardcoded stripping of binaries
- -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 no longer needed
rpmlint output:
uml_utilities.src:19: W: setup-not-quiet
uml_utilities.x86_64: E: setuid-binary /usr/bin/uml_net root 04755
uml_utilities.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/bin/uml_net 04755
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings.
I am not sure why setup is not quiet, since all it contains is:
%setup -n tools-%{ver}
which only untars the source without an error.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464781] Review Request: flexdock - Java docking UI element. First package.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464781 --- Comment #14 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 12:37:25 EDT --- You are supposed to increase the revision of the rpm (and document any changes in the %changelog section) and post the complete urls for spec and srpm in the bugzilla comment. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467798] Review Request: dnsperf - Benchmarking authorative and recursing DNS 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=467798 --- Comment #10 from Paul Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 12:56:10 EDT --- Oh, I had done that because you had said licence should be MIT. Otherwise no problems. and I had made that change. sorry -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467798] Review Request: dnsperf - Benchmarking authorative and recursing DNS 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=467798 Paul Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457926] Review Request: python-wikimarkup - Python module to format text to Mediawiki syntax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457926 Soumya Kanti Chakraborty [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 --- Comment #18 from Soumya Kanti Chakraborty [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 12:57:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #16) Okay, thank you for reply. The New SRPM and SPEC file :- Spec URL: http://soumya.fedorapeople.org/python-wikimarkup.spec SRPM URL: http://soumya.fedorapeople.org/python-wikimarkup-1.01-3.005svn.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 469474] Review Request: sovix - A website revision 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=469474 --- Comment #2 from vivek shah [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:09:23 EDT --- Thanks for the comments, as far as I see these are not blockers as far as the Package review guidelines are concerned. Will you be assigning the review of this package to yourself and do a complete review (if it is not already done) because then I can fix all the suggestions that you mentioned in the spec file in one go. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 447847] Review Request: unbound - Validating, recursive, and caching DNS(SEC) resolver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447847 Paul Wouters [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469474] Review Request: sovix - A website revision 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=469474
--- Comment #3 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:20:55
EDT ---
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Using_.25.7Bbuildroot.7D_and_.25.7Boptflags.7D_vs_.24RPM_BUILD_ROOT_and_.24RPM_OPT_FLAGS
kind of makes clear that using %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT should not be
done.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469470] Review Request: mz - A fast versatile packet generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469470 --- Comment #4 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:18:47 EDT --- I was speaking about the binary application's name (i.e. /bin/mz -- /bin/mausezahn), not the package name. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457926] Review Request: python-wikimarkup - Python module to format text to Mediawiki syntax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457926 Soumya Kanti Chakraborty [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459010] Review request: pystatgrab - Python bindings for libstatgrab
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459010 --- Comment #11 from Soumya Kanti Chakraborty [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:24:16 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) Okay, now I am sponsoring you. Please follow Join wiki again. Thanks Mamoru for sponsoring 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 467854] Review Request: parprouted - Proxy ARP IP bridging daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467854 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #22 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:34:01 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467182] Review Request: hunspell-sc - Sardinian hunspell dictionary
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467182 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:34:48 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469114] Review Request: hunspell-mn - Mongolian hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469114 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:35:25 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445970] Review Request: g2ipmsg - 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 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:36:38 EDT --- Thanks for fixing that. cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452108] Review Request: cfdg-fe - A frontend for cfdg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452108 Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 13:38:02 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457926] Review Request: python-wikimarkup - Python module to format text to Mediawiki syntax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457926 Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #19 from Mamoru Tasaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 14:15:45 EDT --- - This package (python-wikimarkup) is APPROVED by mtasaka - As I wrote in bug 459010, please follow Join wiki. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469291] Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #4 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01
14:34:07 EDT ---
try
%setup -q -n tools-%{ver}
the Source0 is very strange, looks like jdike and blaisorblade is not using
sourceforge to host files, the best options is ask where are located the
lasted version and what's the right address for downloading 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 443675] Review Request: sip-redirect - Tiny IPv4 and IPv6 SIP redirect server written in Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443675 --- Comment #9 from Robert Scheck [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 14:41:16 EDT --- Ping? What are we currently lacking? The first two points from comment #6 are just a minor change, the third one I would like to avoid for the given reason. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469291] Review Request: uml_utilities - Utilities for user-mode linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469291
--- Comment #5 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01
14:50:53 EDT ---
what's the difference between
this:
mylib=`echo %{_libdir} | sed s/\/usr//`
ln -s ..$mylib/uml/port-helper $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/port-helper
and this :
ln -s %{_libdir}/uml/port-helper $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/port-helper
?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: main package name here - short summary here
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514 Javier Palacios [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] New: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514 Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here 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://www.freewebs.com/javiplx/Fedora/debmirror/debmirror.spec SRPM URL: http://www.freewebs.com/javiplx/Fedora/debmirror/debmirror-20070123-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: This program downloads and maintains a partial local Debian mirror. It can mirror any combination of architectures, distributions and sections. Files are transferred by ftp, http, hftp or rsync, and package pools are fully supported. It also does locking and updates trace 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 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514 Javier Palacios [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: main |Review Request: debmirror - |package name here - short |debian partial mirror |summary here |script -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514
Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01
15:41:26 EDT ---
I belive you need use some macros, something like this -
/usr/bin/debmirror - %{_bindir}/debmirror
cp debmirror $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/bin - cp -p debmirror
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}
-p = preserve timestamp
for more info about macros.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#Macros
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514 --- Comment #2 from Javier Palacios [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 15:56:26 EDT --- I'll delay the upload of the new version a couple of days to wait for more comments, but both changes are applied. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514
Terje Røsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #3 from Terje Røsten [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 16:18:55 EDT
---
Yes, this is simple package which could be even simpler:
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/bin
cp debmirror $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/usr/bin
-
%{__rm} -rf %{buildroot}
%{__install} -pD -m 0755 %{name} %{buildroot}%{_bindir}/%{name}
%clean
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
-
%clean
%{__rm} -rf %{buildroot}
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%doc debmirror.conf
/usr/bin/debmirror
-
%files
%defattr(-, root ,root, -)
%doc %{name}.conf
%{_bindir}/%{name}
BTW: why is the explicit req:
Requires: perl-LockFile-Simple
needed?
rpmbuild don't find this req. by itself?
GPL as license is not correct, is it GPLv2, GPLv2+, GPLv3 or GPLv3+ ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457109] Review-Request: perl-TAP-Harness-JUnit - Generate JUnit compatible output from TAP results
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457109 Lubomir Rintel [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Lubomir Rintel [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 16:23:32 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-TAP-Harness-JUnit Short Description: Generate JUnit compatible output from TAP results Owners: lkundrak Branches: EL-5 F-9 F-10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468517] Review Request: saoimage - Utility for displaying astronomical images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468517 Lubomir Rintel [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Lubomir Rintel [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 16:22:03 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) Thank you for the package. The package looks sane, please take into consideration Mamoru's comment and fix small cosmetic issue around desktop file and this package is APPROVED. Will do. Thanks. ./saoimage.desktop: warning: key Encoding in group Desktop Entry is deprecated Encoding used to be mandatory, and including it is not an error yet. Will exclude it from recent Fedora branches and devel. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: saoimage Short Description: Utility for displaying astronomical images Owners: lkundrak Branches: EL-5 F-9 F-10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514
--- Comment #4 from Itamar Reis Peixoto [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01
16:25:52 EDT ---
I belive the correct license tag should be GPLv2, also take a look on rpmlint
message about Misc group.
rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/noarch/debmirror-20070123-1.fc9.noarch.rpm
debmirror.noarch: W: non-standard-group Misc
debmirror.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
I belive all files in debian dir should be installed as %doc, including
doc/design.txt
look
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Configuration_files
and Why you don`t install debmirror.conf in %{_sysconfdir} using
%config(noreplace) ? also why you have included a patch moving this file to
$HOME ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514
--- Comment #5 from Javier Palacios [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 16:49:34
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #3)
rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
-
%{__rm} -rf %{buildroot}
For so simple commands I personally prefer to use them instead of the macros
BTW: why is the explicit req:
Requires: perl-LockFile-Simple
needed?
Probably rpmbuild finds that, that is an explicit requirement of the software,
and it does not hurt
GPL as license is not correct, is it GPLv2, GPLv2+, GPLv3 or GPLv3+ ?
I really don't know which version. It's probably whichever version is standard
for debian.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC 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 #28 from Bryan O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 16:56:26 EDT --- Jason, is there any more information you need from us before you can proceed? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514
--- Comment #6 from Javier Palacios [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 17:05:56
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
rpmlint /usr/src/redhat/RPMS/noarch/debmirror-20070123-1.fc9.noarch.rpm
debmirror.noarch: W: non-standard-group Misc
debmirror.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL
I saw that, but I can made no guess about GPL version. Regarding the group,
where is the list of standard groups?
I belive all files in debian dir should be installed as %doc, including
doc/design.txt
I've added changelog, debian.NEWS and design. The remaining files on debian
directory are only used to construct debian packages
look
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Configuration_files
and Why you don`t install debmirror.conf in %{_sysconfdir} using
%config(noreplace) ? also why you have included a patch moving this file to
$HOME ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514
--- Comment #7 from Javier Palacios [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 17:16:34
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
and Why you don`t install debmirror.conf in %{_sysconfdir} using
%config(noreplace) ? also why you have included a patch moving this file to
$HOME ?
The patch is to avoid the /etc/debmirror.conf gets a requirement.
The sample configuration file is not included because I build this package to
use with cobbler, and I see easier to clear the configuration file, as most
options must be rewritten to sync different repositories
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469527] New: Review Request: tcping - Check of TCP connection to a given IP/Port
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: tcping - Check of TCP connection to a given IP/Port https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469527 Summary: Review Request: tcping - Check of TCP connection to a given IP/Port 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://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/tcping.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/tcping-1.3.4-1.fc9.src.rpm Project URL: http://www.linuxco.de/tcping/tcping.html Description: tcping does a TCP connect to the given ip/port combination. The user can specify a timeout in seconds. This is useful in shell scripts running in firewalled environments. Often SYNs are just being dropped by firewalls, thus connection establishment will be retried several times (for minutes) until a TCP timeout is reached. With tcping it is possible to check first if the desired port is reachable and then start connection establishment. Koji scratch builds: F9: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=914530 F10: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=914535 rpmlint output: [EMAIL PROTECTED] i386]$ rpmlint -i tc* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [EMAIL PROTECTED] SRPMS]$ rpmlint -i tc* 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 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 467854] Review Request: parprouted - Proxy ARP IP bridging daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467854 --- Comment #23 from Paulo Roma Cavalcanti [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 18:40:03 EDT --- Hi, I built the package and used bodhi for moving it to testing: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/userinfo?packageOrder=-blockeduserID=866buildOrder=-completion_timebuildStart=0#packagelist However, I did understand why there is only one tag dist f-8. What does this mean? My previous CVS Request did not include the devel (F10) branch. Although I could build parprouted for F10, I could not send it for testing. Should I do another CVS Request for F10? Use make tag? Finally, what is the rule for moving a package from testing to stable? Could it have gone to stable directly? Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469514] Review Request: debmirror - debian partial mirror script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469514
Ralf Corsepius [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Comment #8 from Ralf Corsepius [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 19:19:44 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #5)
Requires: perl-LockFile-Simple
needed?
Probably rpmbuild finds that, that is an explicit requirement of the software,
and it does not hurt
It is both superfluous and wrong
(correct would be Requires: perl(LockFile::Simple)).
(In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #4)
and Why you don`t install debmirror.conf in %{_sysconfdir} using
%config(noreplace) ? also why you have included a patch moving this file to
$HOME ?
The patch is to avoid the /etc/debmirror.conf gets a requirement.
The sample configuration file is not included because I build this package to
use with cobbler, and I see easier to clear the configuration file, as most
options must be rewritten to sync different repositories
That's not how packages are supposed to work in fedora.
IMO, this package should not be accepted with this patch.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226526] Merge Review: vim
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226526 Ruben Kerkhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469114] Review Request: hunspell-mn - Mongolian hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469114 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454408] Review Request: mingw32-binutils - MinGW Windows binutils
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454408 Ralf Corsepius [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Comment #14 from Ralf Corsepius [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 19:48:21 EDT --- I would recommend to add --disable-infos to %configure to avoid wasting time on building the infos. Finally, I would have approved this package, if it wasn't providing this: mingw32-binutils(x86-64) = 2.18.50_20080109_2-8.fc10 What is this meant to mean? IMO, it's meaningless. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467182] Review Request: hunspell-sc - Sardinian hunspell dictionary
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467182 Caolan McNamara [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 462535] Review Request: python-foolscap - Next-generation RPC protocol, intended to replace Perspective Broker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462535 --- Comment #4 from Ruben Kerkhof [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 20:25:08 EDT --- Thanks Jon, New version here: Spec URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/python-foolscap.spec SRPM URL: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/python-foolscap-0.3.1-3.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 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 --- Comment #9 from Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 21:43:53 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Devel-GlobalDestruction Short Description: Expose PL_dirty Owners: cweyl Branches: F-8 F-9 devel InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Chris Weyl [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 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 --- Comment #8 from Chris Weyl [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 21:43:05 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Devel-GlobalDestruction Short Description: Expose PL_dirty Owners: cweyl Branches: F-8 F-9 devel InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 461139] Review Request: Thabit-fonts from Arabeyes.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461139 Subhodip Biswas [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?([EMAIL PROTECTED] | |.com) | --- Comment #24 from Subhodip Biswas [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 21:59:20 EDT --- i have mailed upstream since i am not a direct contributer to olpc . Anyways I am still waiting for a reply -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469470] Review Request: mz - A fast versatile packet generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469470 --- Comment #5 from vivek shah [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 23:21:10 EDT --- But why would I want to split the binary name from mz to mausezahn when it is not causing any conflict with biaries of any other package and not keep the binary name consistent with the package name and the manual page. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469470] Review Request: mz - A fast versatile packet generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469470 --- Comment #6 from manuel wolfshant [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-01 23:33:25 EDT --- Because a) two letter commands are a scarce resource b) http://www.google.ro/search?q=mz returns nothing useful on the first page while http://www.google.ro/search?q=mausezahn contains only useful stuff. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
