[Bug 475799] Review Request: pidgin-musictracker - Pidgin displays the musictrack currently playing in your status
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475799 --- Comment #12 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2008-12-17 03:20:56 EDT --- There is no answer from the reporter of the other pidgin-musictracker review request so far. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469080 I will close the other review request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469080] Review Request: pidgin-musictracker - plugin for Pidgin which displays the music track currently playing in the status message
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469080 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449 Resolution||NOTABUG Flag|needinfo?(jon.herman...@gma | |il.com) | --- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2008-12-17 03:22:28 EDT --- I'm close this Review request because there is an other one and the reporter seems to be not longer interested. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475799] Review Request: pidgin-musictracker - Pidgin displays the musictrack currently playing in your status
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475799
--- Comment #13 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2008-12-17
03:40:06 EDT ---
Some comments on your spec file
- License: GPLv2
What's is about the copyright in the NEWS file?
- 'Source0:
http://pidgin-musictracker.googlecode.com/files/pidgin-musictracker-0.4.4.tar.bz2'
can be
'http://pidgin-musictracker.googlecode.com/files/musictracker-%{version}.tar.bz2'
no worries about the version in the future to get the source
- No 'BuildRequires' ? I think that this didn't work in mock.
- This is a pidgin plugin but Pidgin is not a requirement?
- 'make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT' better use 'make DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
INSTALL=install -p install' to preserves the files' timestamps.
- '%doc AUTHORS ChangeLog COPYING NEWS README'
The file THANKS is missing
- For your file section, take a lot at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exclusion_of_Static_Libraries
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Relocatable_packages
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo#Macros
- Your %changelog don't match the guidelines
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 476471] Review Request: fedora-Linux_Security_Guide - A security guide for linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476471 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2008-12-17 04:12:12 EDT --- Can you please provide an URL to the spec file? It's much easier for possible reviewers to have a look at it. Some quick comments on your spec file: - The name of this package is a bit wired. Upper case, underscore, version, and language. According the other doc stuff (e.g. fedora-release-notes) 'fedora-security-guide' would be nice or 'linux-security-guide'. - 'Source0:' should point to the upstream source location, if possible. - About the .desktop file. The guidelines says that it should be include as 'SourceX:' https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files See 'desktop-file-install usage' for details about the installation of this file. Get in touch with upstream and ask them to include the .desktop file. - There is no entry in your %changelog section 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 458643] Review Request: dansguardian - Content filtering web proxy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458643 Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|sayami...@gmail.com |fe...@fetzig.org --- Comment #14 from Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org 2008-12-17 04:17:21 EDT --- Here are some issues that need to be addressed imo (without trying to impose my personal style of writing specs :-) before I can start the real review process - why do you %define real_name DansGuardian when it is never used in the spec any further? - why does BuildRequires: gcc-c++, have a ',' at the end when there's nothing following? - you should better include dansguardian.httpd and dansguardian.init into a source file. That would improve readability of the spec. - you seem not to have written a patch as suggested in comment #8 - in %files why do you set %defattr(-, root, root, 0755) instead of %defattr(-, root, root, -)? Is it really necessary to mark all files executeable? - same for %defattr(0700, nobody, nobody, 0755) a few lines after that - don't put www files in /var/www. You should rather put them into /usr/share/dansguardian. Then you would also need to rewrite the apache config that is supplied. See the package phpMyAdmin for an example. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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
--- Comment #14 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2008-12-17 04:25:17 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #12)
It looks mostly OK. You should move from %{buildroot} to $RPM_BUILD_ROOT as
its
the standard now. Other than that once there's an updated package I'll do a
full review.
There is nothing wrong with using %{buildroot} in general:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#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 471754] Review Request: virtaal - Localization and translation editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471754 --- Comment #5 from Dwayne Bailey dwa...@translate.org.za 2008-12-17 04:49:12 EDT --- Brennan - Do you want to take this one? No change since we chatted on #fedora-devel. I dropped a message there but you might have missed 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 476832] New: Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832 Summary: Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ita...@ispbrasil.com.br QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: SRPM URL: Description: MyDNS is a free DNS server for UNIX. It was implemented from scratch and is designed to serve records directly from an SQL database (currently either MySQL or PostgreSQL). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470913] Review Request: lv2core - An Audio Plugin Standard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470913
Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bugs.mich...@gmx.net
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2008-12-17
07:40:57 EDT ---
In bug 232465 comment 2 I pointed out that the package is dual-licenced: API
header is LGPLv2+, data file is MIT.
= License: LGPLv2+ and MIT
Authors's COPYING file says BSD-style, but the licence text matches this:
http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
It is not clear to me why neither the LV2 bundledir ( %{_libdir}/lv2 ) nor the
bundle name ( lv2core.lv2 ) are defined anywhere in the lv2.h file. That means
applications would need to define it themselves. Hopefully they get it right
and agree on a standard path.
Home page lists a rev3 (2008-11-08) with a comment in the ChangeLog that says
unstable. Can't find any such classification of rev2.
%files
%doc AUTHORS COPYING README
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
I suggest moving the %defattr one line up.
Actually rpmlint reports this, too.
Summary:An Audio Plugin Standard
I would drop the An . ;)
Starting the %description with the following sentence from the home page would
be an improvement:
LV2 is a standard for plugins and matching host applications, mainly targeted
at audio processing and generation.
With those changes, which can be applied in pkg cvs, it's fine packaging-wise:
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 476471] Review Request: fedora-Linux_Security_Guide - A security guide for linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476471 --- Comment #2 from Eric Christensen e...@christensenplace.us 2008-12-17 11:44:00 EDT --- Spec URL: http://sparks.fedorapeople.org/linux-security-guide.spec Noted on the naming. Will change it to either fedora-security-guide or linux-security-guide (probably latter). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464430] Review Request: k12linux-quick-start-guide - Doc describing how to enable LTSP on Fedora Live LTSP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464430 --- Comment #28 from Peter Scheie pe...@scheie.homedns.org 2008-12-17 09:32:15 EDT --- Icon[en_US]=/usr/share/icons/Bluecurve/48x48/filesystems/gtk-network.png does seem redundant, as does Name[en_US]=K12Linux Quick Start Guide. I think those were automatically added when I just created the icon on the desktop. Will remove. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472791] Review Request: fontbox - A Java library for parsing font 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=472791 --- Comment #3 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2008-12-17 13:27:20 EDT --- Here are a few things I noticed on an initial read-through of the spec file. First, the Java packaging guidelines state that Java packages must BuildRequires: java-devel and Requires: jpackage-utils (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Java#BuildRequires_and_Requires), both of which are missing. Second, I don't understand why you are using a half-maven half-ant build. Shouldn't you go with one or the other? Third, the GCJ guidelines have not been followed (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines). Is there some reason for this? Fourth, the use of dos2unix is unnecessary. You can accomplish the same result as follows: sed -i -e 's/\r//g' list of files Since sed is already in the default set of packages, this does not lead to any BuildRequires. There is no point in fixing the line endings of javadoc files since you are regenerating those files in the %build section anyway. Also, the list of files is too inclusive: dos2unix is being invoked on .pdf, .jpg, .png, .gif, and Thumbs.db files. Those are binary formats, so dos2unix is very probably corrupting them. Also, since the PDF files are just simple transformations of the HTML files, I doubt they add any value. They're extremely short and not linked to one another, so I don't see the point in including them. Fifth, changing the encodings of the XML files in docs/skin is not sufficient, since they use XML encoding declarations at the top: ?xml version=1.0 encoding=ISO-8859-1? which means that we are now messing up any XML processors because they are really getting UTF-8 encoded files. This won't matter for the English file, because it uses only ASCII, which is a subset of both UTF-8 and ISO-8859-1. However, the German, Spanish, and French versions all use non-ASCII characters, so it will matter for them. If you really need to change the encoding, I recommend making a patch that both changes the encoding and changes the XML encoding declaration. MUST items: - Output of rpmlint: 2 packages and 1 specfile checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. - Package name: OK - Spec file name: OK X Packaging guidelines: see the list of items above - Licensing guidelines: OK - License field matches: OK - Text license file in %doc: OK - Spec file in American English: OK - Spec file is legible: OK - Sources match upstream: OK (checked with md5sum) - Compiles into binary RPMs on at least one platform: OK (checked on x86_64) - Use of ExcludeArch: OK (I did not check other arches, but this is noarch) X All build dependencies in BuildRequires: need to add java-devel; see above - Proper locale handling: OK - ldconfig: OK - Relocatable package: OK - Own all created directories: OK - No duplicate entries in %files: OK - Proper file permissions: OK - %clean section: OK - Consistent use of macros: OK - Code or permissible content: OK - Large documentation: OK (total documentation size is 424K) - Nothing in %doc affects runtime: OK - Header files in -devel: OK - Static libraries in -static: OK - Pkgconfig files: OK - .so files in -devel: OK - -devel package requires main package: OK - No libtool archives: OK - Desktop file: OK - Don't own files/directories owned by other packages: OK - Clean buildroot in %install: OK - Filenames are UTF-8: OK SHOULD items: - Query upstream for missing license file: OK - Description and summary translations: OK - Package builds in mock: OK (checked for F-10 x86_64 only) - Builds on all supported architectures: did not check - Package functions as described: did not check - Sane scriptlets: see comments about maven ant above X Subpackages require the base package: NO, the javadoc package does not require the main package - Placement of pkgconfig files: OK - File dependencies: OK -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452413] Review Request: BkChem - Chemical drawing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452413 --- Comment #24 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-17 13:42:38 EDT --- Some notes for 0.12.5-2: * License - As I said above, the license tag should be GPLv2+ and GFDL * About Patch1 - I guess the size of Patch1 is unneededly large. Would you - simply remove unneeded files - and create a patch for the rest part? (It seems actually only setup.py is patched?) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 221717] Review Request: agg - C++ rendering framework, move from core to shared
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=221717 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org --- Comment #26 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2008-12-17 13:48:40 EDT --- Looks like Kevin now owns this package; updating the CC. I never found the time to get back to this, but I should be able to do so soon. The rpmlint complaint list is currently: agg.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libaggplatformsdl.so.2.0.4 ['/usr/lib64'] agg.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libaggplatformX11.so.2.0.4 ['/usr/lib64'] agg.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/lib64/libaggfontfreetype.so.2.0.4 ['/usr/lib64'] These are new since my last comment, and need tto be fixed up. agg.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libaggplatformsdl.so.2.0.4 _Z8agg_mainiPPc agg.x86_64: W: undefined-non-weak-symbol /usr/lib64/libaggplatformX11.so.2.0.4 _Z8agg_mainiPPc These are OK as discussed above. agg.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libaggplatformsdl.so.2.0.4 /lib64/libpthread.so.0 agg.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libaggplatformsdl.so.2.0.4 /lib64/libm.so.6 agg.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libaggplatformX11.so.2.0.4 /lib64/libm.so.6 These are not a big deal as discussed above, but are easy to get rid of. -- 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 453703] Review Request: trilinos - A collection of libraries of numerical algorithms
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453703 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||NotReady --- Comment #22 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2008-12-17 13:55:57 EDT --- So this was marked as being ready for review, but there's still a license concern. I'm going to mark this again as not being ready. It has also been two months since the last set of questions with no response from the submitter. Are you still working out the license issues with upstream? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475593] Review Request: fontpackages - Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475593 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2008-12-17 13:59:14 EDT --- fontpackages-1.11-1.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fontpackages-1.11-1.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 468003] Review Request: qmtest - an automated software test execution 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=468003
--- Comment #25 from Stefan Seefeld seef...@sympatico.ca 2008-12-17 14:00:25
EDT ---
I have uploaded an srpm and a spec file to http://stefan.fedorapeople.org/.
By the way, is there any reason why the source package name includes the build
platform ('fc9') ? This isn't actually a platform-specific file, or is it ?
If not, shall I rename such files in the future before uploading (or importing
into CVS) ?
Thanks,
Stefan
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473452] Review Request: system-config-services-docs - Documentation for configuring system services
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473452 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ti...@math.uh.edu | |) | --- Comment #15 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2008-12-17 13:58:46 EDT --- Not sure why you set the needinfo flag; I don't believe I've been slow in responding to you. Normally I wouldn't ask for an updated package for the yelp dependency, but there's still the issue of the dependencies necessary to run the scriptlets which needs to be addressed as well. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475593] Review Request: fontpackages - Common directory and macro definitions used by font packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475593 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2008-12-17 14:00:16 EDT --- fontpackages-1.11-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fontpackages-1.11-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454416] Review Request: mingw32-zlib - MinGW Windows zlib compression 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=454416
Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #5 from Adam Tkac at...@redhat.com 2008-12-17 08:20:18 EDT ---
Sorry for late response.
Formal review:
source files match upstream: YES
package meets naming and versioning guidelines: YES
specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently:
YES
dist tag is present: YES
build root is correct: YES
license field matches the actual license: YES
latest version is being packaged: YES
BuildRequires are proper: YES
compiler flags are appropriate: NO
%clean is present: YES
package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64): YES
---
rpmlint is silent: NO:
$ rpmlint mingw32-zlib-1.2.3-10.fc11.src.rpm
mingw32-zlib.src:46: W: configure-without-libdir-spec
- wouldn't be better to add --libdir=%{_mingw32_libdir} configure parameter?
$ rpmlint mingw32-zlib-1.2.3-10.fc11.noarch.rpm
mingw32-zlib.noarch: W: no-documentation
mingw32-zlib.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/zlib.h
mingw32-zlib.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libz.dll.a
mingw32-zlib.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/include/zconf.h
mingw32-zlib.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libz.dll.a
mingw32-zlib.noarch: W: non-standard-dir-in-usr i686-pc-mingw32
- OK (there is no reason to separate headers to -devel - noone will use
mingw32-zlib-libs package without -devel on Fedora)
--
final provides and requires look sane: YES
doesn't own any directories it shouldn't: YES
no duplicates in %files: YES
file permissions are appropriate: YES
code, not content: YES
documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary: YES
Currently I see two problems:
- compiler flags are not correct, it seems you have to add
CFLAGS=%{_mingw32_cflags} parameter to make
- static version of library is packaged:
$ file /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libz.dll.a
/usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libz.dll.a: current ar archive
MinGW packaging guidelines says that static libraries should be packaged in
-static subpackage (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW, Static
libraries statement). Yes, it is pedantry but guidelines should be honoured.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475962] Review Request: mitter - A maemo/GTK+ client for twitter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475962 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460779] Review Request: nekovm - Neko embedded scripting language and virtual machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460779 --- Comment #13 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2008-12-17 05:51:31 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=327224) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=327224) update set-soname patch - make libneko.so.1 real file and libneko.so symlink - use cp -d when copying the libs otherwise (plain cp) the symlink was dereferenced to the real file -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476829] Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476829 --- Comment #3 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2008-12-17 12:23:45 EDT --- Yes, that sounds completely reasonable. Few notes before full review: - you can drop setting the CFLAGS for the make commands in %build, there is no C/C++ code built, if I see it right - are the INSTALLSITELIB and INSTALLSITEARCH really required for the make commands in %install? They looks like some pythonic paths. - what is the upstream versioning scheme? Does the version in the included archive mean that it is a snapshot made 20081124 after the 3.0 release? Then you should apply post-release package guideline - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Post-Release_packages (version=3.0, release=1.20081124) - according to the README in foomatic-db, there should be files licensed under MIT too, please recheck and update the License tag to GPLv2+ and MIT - new snapshot was released today :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472792] Review Request: jempbox - A Java library that implements Adobe's XMP specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472792 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kon...@tylerc.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kon...@tylerc.org Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473452] Review Request: system-config-services-docs - Documentation for configuring system services
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473452 Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(ti...@math.uh.edu ||) --- Comment #14 from Nils Philippsen nphil...@redhat.com 2008-12-17 05:41:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) OK, it looks like the concensus seems to be that this package should not own /usr/share/gnome/help, so that's OK. There is a question of whether this package should depend on yelp, as without it there's no way to actually look at the contained documentation. But that, again, is up to you. I dropped the yelp dependency a while ago while the documentation was still part of the main package, so that Live media could be created which didn't pull in yelp (to meet space constraints), yet had the tools. Now that the documentation is split off, I can just do the right thing and let this depend on yelp again. Do you want another round of SRPMS/Spec files with that change? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474982] Review Request: nachocalendar - Provides a flexible Calendar component to the Java Platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474982 --- Comment #8 from Sandro Mathys s...@sandro-mathys.ch 2008-12-17 08:09:05 EDT --- If Mary wants to, I'm happy to let her be the maintainer of this pkg. I really don't care as long as it's part of Fedora ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476387] Review Request: vhd2vl - VHDL to Verilog translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476387 Chitlesh GOORAH cgoo...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Chitlesh GOORAH cgoo...@yahoo.com.au 2008-12-17 14:33:58 EDT --- Thank you, I will update it before committing. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: vhd2vl Short Description: VHDL to Verilog translator Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-5 Owner: chitlesh -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 435276] Review Request: kBuild - A cross-platform build enviroment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=435276 Xavier Lamien lxt...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lxt...@gmail.com Flag|needinfo+ |fedora-review? --- Comment #26 from Xavier Lamien lxt...@gmail.com 2008-12-17 14:48:17 EDT --- taking review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464430] Review Request: k12linux-quick-start-guide - Doc describing how to enable LTSP on Fedora Live LTSP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464430 --- Comment #25 from Patrice Dumas pertu...@free.fr 2008-12-17 04:45:49 EDT --- Also, it seems to me that gtk-network is a link to network-workgroup.png so you'd better use the generic name. Also I don't know if .desktop files for files at the desktop follow the same specification than .desktop in menu, but if it is so, Icon could be Icon=network-workgroup In that case you could avoid the dependency on a precise theme, and either have a dependency on a generic virtual provides, if one exists or no dependency at all since a theme should be installed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473972] Review Request: nufw - Authentication Firewall Suite for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473972
--- Comment #10 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2008-12-17 07:50:59 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Hi,
I have fixed all the Warning and Errors (i do rpmlint on each packages). Just
two things :
- libnuclient.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libnuclient.so.3.0.0
e...@glibc_2.2.5 - it's only when we have a violent error
OK
- I have submitted the patch upstream, but haven't add the link in specfile
because i post the ticket in the private bugtracker. The patch will be added
to
the next release.
OK
there are still few little issues
- the ldconfig calls in the scriptlets for the main package are useless (the
libnuclient package already has them)
- I would prefer when the /etc/sysconfig/nufw file is added as new SourceX:
instead of online creation in the %install section
- mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs in the spec (spaces: line 244, tab: line 3)
- BuildRequires: python for the python-nufw package is redundant (this
dependency is auto-solved via python-devel)
- the DefaultStop line in the initscripts should contain all levels 0 - 6 to
complement DefaultStart
- multiple packages own the %{_sysconfdir}/nufw/ directory - that depends on
the exact interaction between the packages
- must be the nuauth service run on the same machine as nufw?
- does have sense to have only the nufw-utils or nutcpc packages installed
(without nufw)?
- are the files in %{_sysconfdir}/nufw/ properly separated between nufw and
nuauth?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476829] Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476829 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@danny.cz Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464430] Review Request: k12linux-quick-start-guide - Doc describing how to enable LTSP on Fedora Live LTSP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464430 --- Comment #30 from Patrice Dumas pertu...@free.fr 2008-12-17 11:48:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #27) gtk-network.png is a link to /usr/share/icons/Bluecurve/48x48/apps/icon-network-systems.png. I specifically chose that icon because it looks a bit like one large computer connected to two smaller computers, somewhat akin to an LTSP server and its clients. I rejected other network icons because they don't convey the idea of thin clients. Ok. I have checked that only Bluecurve provides this icon: # repoquery -f '*icon-network-systems.png' bluecurve-icon-theme-0:8.0.2-2.fc10.noarch bluecurve-icon-theme-0:8.0.2-2.fc10.noarch Still a bluecurve-icon-theme requires missing. Also did you try with only Icon=icon-network-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 472792] Review Request: jempbox - A Java library that implements Adobe's XMP specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472792 --- Comment #2 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 07:49:57 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=327246) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=327246) [Review] Attached is my initial review. Thanks for submitting this software to Fedora! General comments: - Why the %update_maven_depmap and friends? It uses ant to build, not maven (note: I don't think this is wrong necessarily, I'm just unfamiliar with maven and would like to understand if this should be part of the java packaging guidelines for ant-built packages as well as maven). Will approve as soon as BAD marked thing is either fixed or explained. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460779] Review Request: nekovm - Neko embedded scripting language and virtual machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460779 --- Comment #14 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2008-12-17 05:53:18 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=327225) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=327225) create -libs subpackage to be multilib compliant -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476414] Review Request: assogiate - Editor for the file types database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476414 --- Comment #10 from Lubos Stanek lu...@users.sourceforge.net 2008-12-17 06:25:19 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=327229) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=327229) modify sources to include the new message catalog -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225618] Merge Review: bitstream-vera-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=225618 Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #17 from Nicolas Mailhot nicolas.mail...@laposte.net 2008-12-17 15:15:34 EDT --- Spec updated to latest guidelines as part of the F11 fonts packaging guidelines change -- 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 473537] Review Request: jcodings - Java Libraries for Ruby String Encodings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473537 Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mefos...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mefos...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Mary Ellen Foster mefos...@gmail.com 2008-12-17 15:16:27 EDT --- [ NB: Borrowing the review format from Jerry James ... ] It's just recently been pointed out to me that there are specific GCJ guidelines for Java packages at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines that should probably be followed here unless there's a good reason not to. MUST items: - Output of rpmlint: jcodings.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. --- Is there any documentation at all to be had from upstream? - Package name: OK - Spec file name: OK - Packaging guidelines: note the GCJ thing above - Licensing guidelines: OK X License field matches: What is the license of this? JRuby as a whole is tri-licensed as CPL/GPL/LGPL, so I'm not sure that MIT is the right content here - Text license file in %doc: no, but it's not shipped with the source - Spec file in American English: OK - Spec file is legible: OK - Sources match upstream: OK (checked with sha1sum) - Compiles into binary RPMs on at least one platform: OK (checked on i386) - Use of ExcludeArch: OK (I did not check other arches, but this is noarch) - All build dependencies in BuildRequires: OK - Proper locale handling: OK - ldconfig: OK - Relocatable package: OK - Own all created directories: OK - No duplicate entries in %files: OK - Proper file permissions: OK - %clean section: OK - Consistent use of macros: OK - Code or permissible content: OK - Large documentation: OK (*no* documentation actually!) - Nothing in %doc affects runtime: OK - Header files in -devel: OK - Static libraries in -static: OK - Pkgconfig files: OK - .so files in -devel: OK - -devel package requires main package: OK - No libtool archives: OK - Desktop file: OK - Don't own files/directories owned by other packages: OK - Clean buildroot in %install: OK - Filenames are UTF-8: OK SHOULD items: X Query upstream for missing license file: see the note at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text It's probably asking if they could put the license(s) into the tarball - Description and summary translations: OK - Package builds in mock: OK (checked for F-10 i386 only) - Builds on all supported architectures: did not check - Package functions as described: did not check - Sane scriptlets: OK - Subpackages require the base package: OK (n/a) - Placement of pkgconfig files: OK - File dependencies: OK -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476712] Package Review: lua-rex - Regular expression handling library for Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476712 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(lkund...@v3.sk) | --- Comment #4 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2008-12-17 07:04:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Should the .so files go in a -devel subpackage? No. They are not meant for use by linker, lua interpreter looks for .so files specifically. I'm thinking whether it makes sense to ship the .2.4 files, but it's that just because upstream does so. The .so files don't have a SONAME and are not used by dynamic linker, just dlopened by lua. License seems good Why isn't doc/ packaged in %doc ? I just forgot. I'll be including it in new package I'll post shortly. Why aren't smp_flags used? There's a comment. Or should I be more specific than just doesn't work? What is the purpose of the manual lrexlib Provides? What will be Requiring that, other than the other auto-generated Provides: rex_onig.so.2.4 rex_pcre.so.2.4 rex_posix.so.2.4 lua-rex = 2.4.0-1.fc11 lua-rex(x86-32) = 2.4.0-1.fc11 That's an upstream name. While it is desirable to name this package lua-rex, to denote it's a lua rex module there's a chance people will try to install it by doing yum install lrexlib. If I remember correctly this is a recommended practice for perl modules, and I assumed it would be the same for lua. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476414] Review Request: assogiate - Editor for the file types database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476414 --- Comment #9 from Lubos Stanek lu...@users.sourceforge.net 2008-12-17 06:23:49 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=327228) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=327228) the Czech message catalog -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475962] Review Request: mitter - A maemo/GTK+ client for twitter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475962 --- Comment #4 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 07:18:30 EDT --- And it's a very minor thing -- very clean 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 476829] New: Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476829 Summary: Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: twa...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://twaugh.fedorapeople.org/foomatic-db/foomatic-db.spec SRPM URL: http://twaugh.fedorapeople.org/foomatic-db/foomatic-db-3.0.0.20081124-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: This is the database of printers, printer drivers, and driver options for Foomatic. The site http://www.openprinting.org/ is based on this database. -- Note to reviewer: This package has been split out of the main 'foomatic' package. The reason is that the database itself should be a noarch package as it is architecture-independent, while the engine for accessing it is small but architecture-dependent. Once this package has been approved I will adjust the main foomatic package so that it requires foomatic-db (and does not ship the database itself). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464430] Review Request: k12linux-quick-start-guide - Doc describing how to enable LTSP on Fedora Live LTSP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464430 --- Comment #29 from Peter Scheie pe...@scheie.homedns.org 2008-12-17 10:09:48 EDT --- -Fixed broken path in .desktop file. -Removed Icon[en_US] and Name[en_US] lines in .desktop because they were redundant. -Added CC license to .html file as a comment. -Changed URL to peterscheie.fedorapeople.org/k12linux/quick-start-guide/. -Uploaded .tar.bz2 file to peterscheie.fedorapeople.org -Incremented revision number to 0.0.4. -Uploaded RPM and SRPM files to peterscheie.fedorapeople.org. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474982] Review Request: nachocalendar - Provides a flexible Calendar component to the Java Platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474982 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mefos...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-17 07:23:36 EDT --- *** Bug 469896 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 468003] Review Request: qmtest - an automated software test execution 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=468003 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 | --- Comment #24 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-17 12:13:53 EDT --- $ LANG=C rpmbuild -ts qmtest-2.4.1.tar.gz error: Failed to read spec file from qmtest-2.4.1.tar.gz ?? (anyway would you provide your srpm? It is much helpful) By the way I am sponsoring you now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476414] Review Request: assogiate - Editor for the file types database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476414 Lubos Stanek lu...@users.sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lu...@users.sourceforge.net --- Comment #8 from Lubos Stanek lu...@users.sourceforge.net 2008-12-17 06:22:33 EDT --- I created the Czech localization for assoGiate some time ago. It would be great to add it to the package. It was not possible to push it into the upstream. The author has not replied either my mails or his web contact form. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832
Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Alias||mydns
--- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2008-12-17
07:48:37 EDT ---
I need some help packaging mydns.
at this moment mydns doesn't have loadable module support, so I need to compile
mydns 2 times, one for mysql and another for postgresql support, something like
this.
mysql:
%configure --without-pgsql --with-mysql --with-mysql-lib=%{_libdir}/mysql
--with-mysql-include=%{_includedir}/mysql --with-zlib=%{_libdir}
postgresql:
%configure --with-pgsql --without-mysql --with-pgsql-lib=%{_libdir}
--with-pgsql-include=%{_includedir} --with-zlib=%{_libdir}
I like to create one base package and 2 subpackages
mydns
mydns-mysql
mydns-postgresql
but the problem is the name of the files.
/usr/bin/mydns (in mysql subpackage)
/usr/bin/mydns (in postgresql subpackage)
what's the best way to package this ?
renaming files ?
/usr/bin/mydns-mysql (in mysql subpackage)
/usr/bin/mydns-postgresql (in postgresql subpackage)
or there are a way to preserve the mydns name in executable ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226568] Merge Review: xmlto
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226568 --- Comment #12 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2008-12-17 15:42:30 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) So do you suggest to have License: GPLv2+ and GPL+ ? Yes, please also add a comment above the License tag saying that xmlto is GPLv2+ and xmlif is GPL+. Regards, Till -- 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 464074] Review Request: cddlib - A library for generating all vertices in convex polyhedrons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464074 --- Comment #45 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 06:32:43 EDT --- Can we 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 464430] Review Request: k12linux-quick-start-guide - Doc describing how to enable LTSP on Fedora Live LTSP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464430 --- Comment #26 from Patrice Dumas pertu...@free.fr 2008-12-17 04:47:04 EDT --- Also is Icon[en_US]=/usr/share/icons/Bluecurve/48x48/filesystems/gtk-network.png really useful? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460779] Review Request: nekovm - Neko embedded scripting language and virtual machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460779
--- Comment #12 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2008-12-17 04:47:02 EDT ---
I still think it can be split to be multilib compliant
main - %{_bindir} + %{_libdir}/neko/
-libs - %{_libdir}/libneko.so.*
-devel - %{_includedir} + %{_libdir}/libneko.so
both main and -devel will Require -libs
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 471754] Review Request: virtaal - Localization and translation editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=471754 Brennan Ashton bash...@brennanashton.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|bash...@brennanashton.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475962] Review Request: mitter - A maemo/GTK+ client for twitter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475962 --- Comment #1 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 07:03:03 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=327234) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=327234) [Review] Attached is my initial review for the package. Also: please consider updating from Fedora 8 before it goes End of Line very soon! Two very simple BADs to fix and then I'll approve 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 476789] Review Request: python-repoze-what - Authorization for WSGI 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=476789 Jan ONDREJ ondr...@salstar.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ondr...@salstar.sk --- Comment #2 from Jan ONDREJ ondr...@salstar.sk 2008-12-17 08:28:35 EDT --- python-devel is a standard requirement of python-setuptools-devel, so you can remove python-devel from BR. Documentation from docs directory is missing in rpm package. Please, consider adding it into package or may be into a doc subpackage. You need this to build docs: BuildRequires: python-sphinx make -C docs html or make -C docs htmlhelp There is no more problems with this 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 469896] Review Request: nachocalendar - A flexible Calendar component for the Java platform
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469896 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-17 07:23:36 EDT --- Oops, very sorry, but I have already reviewed this one, but submitted by other person... *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 474982 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475962] Review Request: mitter - A maemo/GTK+ client for twitter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475962 --- Comment #3 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 07:18:00 EDT --- In that case someone needs to fix http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files . In the mean time, you only have one thing to fix and I'll approve :). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465943] Review Request: NetworkManager-openconnect - NetworkManager VPN integration for openconnect
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465943 --- Comment #12 from David Woodhouse dw...@infradead.org 2008-12-17 07:49:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #11) A few fixes required. Also as a side note it doesn't look like libgnome is used in the source files but its included in the configure checks but I'm not sure. I've added a patch to remove it from configure.in. Well spotted. + rpmlint output $ rpmlint NetworkManager-openconnect.spec NetworkManager-openconnect.spec: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 70) Fixed. - license matches the actual package license There's no COPYING file included in the source. Some of the source files include the license but some don't include any at all. Added COPYING file in a patch also. Will push upstream. - upstream sources match sources in the srpm 399dc23f2df67d994770dfdfdaec0ecb NetworkManager-openconnect-0.7.0.svn3.tar.gz Package needs to adhere to source requirements, if its using VCS snapshots it needs to be specified as per the Packaging docs. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL Added instructions. - BuildRequires list all build dependencies Not sure why libpng is required. It builds fine without it and doesn't seem to check for it in the configure script. Removed. - package owns all directories it creates /usr/share/gnome-vpn-properties/openconnect/ is not owned by the package Fixed. /usr/share/gnome-vpn-properties/ isn't either and should probably be owned by NetworkManager itself as more than one NM vpn package installs things there. Yeah, that's a NetworkManager bug. - %install must start with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT etc. needs to remove old buildroots Fixed. Spec URL: http://david.woodhou.se/NetworkManager-openconnect.spec SRPM URL: http://david.woodhou.se/NetworkManager-openconnect-0.7.0-2.svn3.fc10.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1003330 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476829] Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476829 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||d...@danny.cz --- Comment #1 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2008-12-17 07:12:52 EDT --- Are you aware that rpmbuild since F-10 can create a noarch subpackage while the main package is arch? It was announced as one of the new features in rpm 4.6. -- 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 476829] Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476829 Tim Waugh twa...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||461234 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||NotReady --- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-17 10:04:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) the mydns-mysql can conflict with mydns-postgresql, so only one will installed and the use alternatives will not needed - I guess in this case Conflict method should not be used and I guess perhaps other reviewers also complain about using Conflict: See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts#Conflicting_Files example. configure --with-mysql make mkdir mysql make install DESTDIR=mysql configure --with-postgresql make mkdir mysql make install DESTDIR=postgresql list files mysql/usr/sbin/mydns postgresql/usr/sbin/mydns is possible to package mysql/usr/sbin/mydns into mydns-mysql package and postgresql/usr/sbin/mydns into mydns-postgresql package ? - This is not possible. For now marking as NotReady. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475962] Review Request: mitter - A maemo/GTK+ client for twitter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475962 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2008-12-17 07:11:27 EDT --- Something about the .desktop file 'desktop-file-install --vendor=fedora \' is obsolete for new packages https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/DesktopFileVendor -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832 --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2008-12-17 09:05:03 EDT --- It seems you forgot to write the URLs of your spec/srpm... Then some guess - If possible, renaming binaries' names (and writing some notes why you renamed the binaries as one document) is the simplest - If you want to keep mydns name, I guess for this case we can use alternatives method (still installed binaries themselves should be renamed) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469485 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(fab...@bernewirel | |ess.net)| --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2008-12-17 04:45:49 EDT --- At the moment there is no Prism2/2.5/3 based 802.11b cards in my hardware pool, I tested only if fakeap runs and not if it's really working. So I miss the dependency of hostap_crypt_conf. Thanks for pointing me to that. I didn't know that aircrack-ng provide such functionality. Because of that I think that it would be better to drop this request or postpone it till hostap-utils is available. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #5 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2008-12-17 08:16:56 EDT --- Please prepare a new srpm and spec file for download so I can continue in the review (with updated Version and/or Release). Fedora prefers small clean spec files without support for other distros, because the use of miscellaneous conditions lowers the legibility and can lead to errors. The present usage of pre/post scripts is wrong, the MIBs and cron files all have their proper (and stable) place in the system and their installation and removing is done by standard means of the rpm program, it can even react on user modified files (e.g. save copies). Some locations are standardized in LSB or FHS, so they are even stable within multiple distros. All binaries that are supposed to be run directly by a (super-)user must live in bin or sbin. Test or demo scripts not required for proper function of a package can be marked and stored as %doc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476832] Review Request: mydns - serve DNS records directly from an SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476832 --- Comment #3 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2008-12-17 09:37:05 EDT --- the mydns-mysql can conflict with mydns-postgresql, so only one will installed and the use alternatives will not needed example. configure --with-mysql make mkdir mysql make install DESTDIR=mysql configure --with-postgresql make mkdir mysql make install DESTDIR=postgresql list files mysql/usr/sbin/mydns postgresql/usr/sbin/mydns is possible to package mysql/usr/sbin/mydns into mydns-mysql package and postgresql/usr/sbin/mydns into mydns-postgresql 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 476829] Review Request: foomatic-db - Database of printers and printer drivers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476829 --- Comment #2 from Tim Waugh twa...@redhat.com 2008-12-17 10:49:31 EDT --- I am, although another reason for having a separate source package is so that bug fixes in the database engine can be distributed separately from the entire database which is quite large. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472848] Review Request: jeuclid - MathML rendering solution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472848 --- Comment #30 from Brennan Ashton bash...@brennanashton.com 2008-12-17 10:19:59 EDT --- Anything else? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475962] Review Request: mitter - A maemo/GTK+ client for twitter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475962 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kon...@tylerc.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kon...@tylerc.org Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472791] Review Request: fontbox - A Java library for parsing font 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=472791 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||loganje...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com 2008-12-17 12:16:29 EDT --- I'll take this one. Stand by for a full review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452413] Review Request: BkChem - Chemical drawing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452413 --- Comment #25 from Henrique LonelySpooky Junior henrique...@gmail.com 2008-12-17 16:17:36 EDT --- Hello, Mamoru, The patch 3 performs tasks in BKChem: * Remove the piddle plugin (excluding the folder, the files related and the entry in setup.py). Piddle is a plugin that is obsolete and will be removed from BKChem in the future because its functions are performed by pycairo today. Moreover, he had several problems of license that the upstream will not be able to solve). * Remove OASA's folder and removes the entries in setup.py. * Exclude Pmw*.py files that are redundant in fedora, since we have a python-pmw package already. Beda was creating a tarball especially for Fedora untill now, but applying patches to the official tarball seemed a better approach to the upstream and save its time. Is there any other alternative that I can take, Mamoru? Sorry if this is taking longer than necessary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426751] Review Request: ghc-X11 - A Haskell binding to the X11 graphics library.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426751
Till Maas opensou...@till.name changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|needinfo?(opensou...@till.n |
|ame)|
--- Comment #36 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2008-12-17 10:22:30 EDT
---
I first looked at how python packages manage to get their python(ABI) = 2.6
dependency. For this rpm has it's own automatic dependency generator. Here is
one for ghc that allows to skip the Requires: ghc and Requires: ghc-prof
dependencies in the spec, because they will be added automatically.
http://till.fedorapeople.org/ghcdeps.sh
I am not yet sure, what the impact of
%define _use_internal_dependency_generator 0
is for ghc packages. I guess this can lead to problems in case there are also
other files included that need the automatic dependency generator, e.g. python
scripts. Maybe the script needs to be adjusted to also call the internal
dependency generator somehow, but this should probably take care of this in the
ghcdep.sh script:
/usr/lib/rpm/rpmdeps --requires $REPLY
For the post, postun, preun dependencies, the only way I found is this
(inspired by kmodtool):
http://till.fedorapeople.org/ghc-script-requires.sh
Instead of the Requires(post) etc, this can be used in the spec, if Source2:
points to the script:
%{expand:%(/bin/bash %SOURCE2 post preun postun)}
With this patch to the spec I was then able to build ghc-zlib with proper
requires afaics:
http://till.fedorapeople.org/ghc-zlib-automatic-requires.patch
Build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1003560
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 464430] Review Request: k12linux-quick-start-guide - Doc describing how to enable LTSP on Fedora Live LTSP.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464430 --- Comment #27 from Peter Scheie pe...@scheie.homedns.org 2008-12-17 09:09:03 EDT --- gtk-network.png is a link to /usr/share/icons/Bluecurve/48x48/apps/icon-network-systems.png. I specifically chose that icon because it looks a bit like one large computer connected to two smaller computers, somewhat akin to an LTSP server and its clients. I rejected other network icons because they don't convey the idea of thin clients. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472792] Review Request: jempbox - A Java library that implements Adobe's XMP specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472792 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452413] Review Request: BkChem - Chemical drawing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452413 --- Comment #26 from Henrique LonelySpooky Junior henrique...@gmail.com 2008-12-17 16:33:21 EDT --- ***The patch performs 3 tasks*** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476758] Review Request: libspiro - Library to simplify the drawing of beautiful curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476758
--- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:41:25 EDT ---
* rpmlint says:
libspiro-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
At the least the license file can go in the %doc of this subpackage. I also
think that the README* files would suit the devel subpackage better.
ok. I can put them in both... not a big deal.
* I suggest you to make use of the %{name} and %{version} macros.
Sure. Good idea.
Thanks!
New Package CVS Request
===
Package Name: libspiro
Short Description: Library to simplify the drawing of beautiful curves
Owners: kevin
Branches: devel
InitialCC:
Lubomir: If you would like to co-maintain this as your inkscape can use it,
feel free to request in pkgdb and I will be happy to approve you.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473476] Review Request: trytond - Server for the Tryton application 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=473476 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:46:35 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 459444] Review Request: ctdb - Clustered TDB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459444 --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:51:46 EDT --- I don't see Abhijith in the packager group. Is this your first fedora package? You will need a sponsor... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 469460] review request: gir-repository - GObject Introspection Repository
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469460 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|walt...@redhat.com Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:48:33 EDT --- Please use Fedora account names in requests. 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 476712] Package Review: lua-rex - Regular expression handling library for Lua
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476712 Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com 2008-12-17 16:47:56 EDT --- Looks great now, approving. At some point you should probably bring a lua packaging guideline suggestion to the FPC since there are a few lua packages in now, and could be more coming. It'd speed up reviews. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460779] Review Request: nekovm - Neko embedded scripting language and virtual machine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460779 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #15 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:52:57 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 476599] Review Request: python-transaction - Transaction Management 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=476599 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:56:16 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 221717] Review Request: agg - C++ rendering framework, move from core to shared
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=221717 --- Comment #27 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org 2008-12-17 16:52:58 EDT --- About the rpaths: ugh, darn autocrap. I'll use the sed hack from the guidelines to get rid of those. -- 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 473591] Review Request: iFuse - Mount Apple iPhone and iPod touch 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=473591 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:54:05 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 476599] Review Request: python-transaction - Transaction Management 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=476599 --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 16:59:59 EDT --- Except not. This package is already in fedora. Owned by lmacken. See bug 468222 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475410] Review Request: symmetrica - A Collection of Routines for Solving Symmetric Groups
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475410 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 17:01:02 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 465362] Review Request: openconnect -- client for Cisco AnyConnect VPN
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465362 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #28 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 17:06:09 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 465897] Review Request: Judy - General purpose dynamic array 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=465897 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #17 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 17:04:12 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 475035] Review Request: metapost-metauml - UML in LaTeX/MetaPost
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475035 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 17:10:43 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 452354] Review Request: entertrack - Web-based artifact tracking/management system written in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452354 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 17:07:32 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 469527] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469527 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 17:13:46 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 462982] Review Request: buffer - General purpose buffer program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462982 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #24 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2008-12-17 17:12:45 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 476776] Review Request: python-shove - Common object storage frontend.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476776 Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jkeat...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jkeat...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com 2008-12-17 17:32:35 EDT --- Taking review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476776] Review Request: python-shove - Common object storage frontend.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476776
Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(lmac...@redhat.co
||m)
--- Comment #2 from Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com 2008-12-17 17:43:55
EDT ---
- Patch should have a comment, and info about upstream status
- Mixed use of $RPM_BUILD_ROOT and %{buildroot}
- Builds OK in mock
- rpmlint output:
python-shove.noarch: W: summary-ended-with-dot Common object storage frontend.
python-shove.noarch: E: description-line-too-long Common object storage
frontend that supports dictionary-style access, object serialization and
compression, and multiple storage and caching backends.
python-shove.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development/Library
- upstream source matches
- All things in store/tests/ are unlicensed.
-- Summary --
Fix up the rpmlint stuff
ask upstream about license on tests/
Fix macro usage to be consistant
Add comment on the 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 476789] Review Request: python-repoze-what - Authorization for WSGI 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=476789 Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jkeat...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Jesse Keating jkeat...@redhat.com 2008-12-17 17:45:37 EDT --- Jan, are you taking the review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467407] Review Request: mingw32-sqlite - MinGW Windows port of sqlite embeddable SQL database engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467407 Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl 2008-12-17 17:50:21 EDT --- Too bad upstream rpmlint refuses to accept patches for MinGW support. Maybe it is an idea to create a list of rpmlint failures which can be ignored for MinGW and put it on the MinGW guidelines page? Anyway, this package looks good enough for inclusion in Fedora: The package mingw32-sqlite is APPROVED by epienbro -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473537] Review Request: jcodings - Java Libraries for Ruby String Encodings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473537 --- Comment #2 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 17:48:27 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) It's just recently been pointed out to me that there are specific GCJ guidelines for Java packages at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/GCJGuidelines that should probably be followed here unless there's a good reason not to. Right, the big deal especially was that there was *no* non-gcj jdk/jre on F-7 PPC/PPC64. Now that F-7 is dead it's been pushed less, but IMO still important because openjdk doesn't JIT on PPC and thus GCJ is *much* faster. WILLDO. ... --- Is there any documentation at all to be had from upstream? Not really -- this is mostly a new subproject of JRuby. ... X License field matches: What is the license of this? JRuby as a whole is tri-licensed as CPL/GPL/LGPL, so I'm not sure that MIT is the right content here This particular subpackage is MIT-licensed. They like to abuse SVN and put a bunch of projects on the same server, even with different licenses. Note the header at e.g. http://svn.jruby.codehaus.org/browse/~raw,r=7964/jruby/jcodings/trunk/src/org/jcodings/unicode/UnicodeCodeRanges.java ... SHOULD items: X Query upstream for missing license file: see the note at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text It's probably asking if they could put the license(s) into the tarball Actually the tarball is automatically generated from SVN, so they need to put the license there. I'll ask. http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/jcodings.spec http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/jcodings-1.0-2.fc9.src.rpm In koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1004755 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468222] Review Request: python-transaction - Transaction management 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=468222 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kon...@tylerc.org --- Comment #4 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 17:50:35 EDT --- *** Bug 476599 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 476599] Review Request: python-transaction - Transaction Management 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=476599 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #8 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 17:50:35 EDT --- Yeah, oops. Closing. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 468222 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476600] Review Request: python-ZODB3 - Zope Object Database: Object Database and Persistence
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476600 Bug 476600 depends on bug 476599, which changed state. Bug 476599 Summary: Review Request: python-transaction - Transaction Management for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476599 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||DUPLICATE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468222] Review Request: python-transaction - Transaction management 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=468222 --- Comment #5 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2008-12-17 17:54:00 EDT --- Btw, License tag is still not fixed in CVS. Also, no updates for F-10 and F-9 yet (not sure if it's even been built 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 476475] Review Request: python-zope-filesystem - Python-Zope Libraries Base 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=476475 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
