[Bug 484507] Review Request: php-channel-ezc - eZ Components
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484507 Guillaume Kulakowski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||490592 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484509] Review Request: php-ezc-Base - eZ Components Base
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484509 Guillaume Kulakowski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||490592 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488542] Review Request: php-ezc-Database - eZ Components 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=488542 Guillaume Kulakowski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||490592 Bug 488542 depends on bug 484509, which changed state. Bug 484509 Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-Base - eZ Components Base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484509 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ON_QA |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 490592] New: Review Request: php-ezc-PersistentObject - eZ Components PersistentObject
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-PersistentObject - eZ Components PersistentObject https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490592 Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-PersistentObject - eZ Components PersistentObject Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: noarch OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: llaum...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Depends on: 484507,484509,488542 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora PersistentObject is a part of eZ Components : https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/php-channel-ezc This component allows you to store an arbitrary data structures to a fixed database table. The component provides all the functionality needed to fetch, list, delete etc these datastructures. SPEC: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-PersistentObject.spec SRPM: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-PersistentObject-1.5-1.fc10.noarch.rpm RPM: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-PersistentObject-1.5-1.fc10.src.rpm rpmlint: buil...@enterprise ~> rpmlint rpmbuild/**/php-ezc-PersistentObject* 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Pear CompatInfo: +-+-+---+++ | Files | Version | C | Extensions | Constants/Tokens | +-+-+---+++ | ./* | 5.0.0 | 0 || ...CTORY_SEPARATOR | | | | || __FUNCTION__ | | | | || abstract | | | | || catch | | | | || implements | | | | || instanceof | | | | || interface | | | | || private| | | | || protected | | | | || public | | | | || throw | | | | || try| +-+-+---+++ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453849] Review Request: globus-libtool - Globus Toolkit - Globus libtool package (virtual GPT glue package)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453849 --- Comment #10 from Hans de Goede 2009-03-17 04:08:36 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #7) > > Please create a Fedora Account System account (if you haven't already) and > > apply for the packager group. When you've done that please drop me a mail > > (or a > > bugzilla comment) with your FAS username and I'll sponsor you. > > My user name is ellert, and I have applied for the packager group. Ok, you've been sponsored. Welcome as Fedora Package Maintainer ! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486390] Review Request: simspark - Spark physical simulation system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486390 --- Comment #5 from Hedayat Vatankhah 2009-03-17 04:13:22 EDT --- New files: SPEC:http://hedayat.fedorapeople.org/simspark_review/0.1-2/simspark.spec SRPM:http://hedayat.fedorapeople.org/simspark_review/0.1-2/simspark-0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489633] Review Request: mingw32-physfs - MinGW Windows port of the PhysicsFS 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=489633 Richard W.M. Jones changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(plo...@gmail.com) --- Comment #17 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-03-17 04:19:54 EDT --- Plouj, next step is to import the package into Fedora's CVS, both the devel and F-10 branches. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Install_the_Client_Tools_.28Koji.29 Roughly speaking the commands are something like this. Please check them carefully. cd /tmp fedora-cvs mingw32-physfs cd mingw32-physfs/devel ../common/cvs-import name-of-the-SRPM cvs up make build cd ../F-10 ../common/cvs-import name-of-the-SRPM cvs up make build make update -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488168] Package Review: ibus-table-wubi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488168 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|peter...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Jens Petersen 2009-03-17 04:19:29 EDT --- What about the license? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488168] Package Review: ibus-table-wubi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488168 Jens Petersen 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 489676] Review Request: perl-XML-Simple-DTDReader - Simple XML file reading based on their DTDs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489676 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Xavier Bachelot 2009-03-17 04:34:18 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-XML-Simple-DTDReader Short Description: Simple XML file reading based on their DTDs Owners: xavierb Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486758] Review Request: yofrankie-bge - 3D Game with characters from Big Buck Bunny movie
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486758 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #22 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-03-17 04:38:34 EDT --- Imported & built & consumed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488665] Review Request: hscolour - Haskell source code highlighter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488665 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen 2009-03-17 04:34:16 EDT --- Thanks for the review. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hscolour Short Description: Haskell source highlighting Owners: petersen Branches: F-10 InitialCC: haskell-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489633] Review Request: mingw32-physfs - MinGW Windows port of the PhysicsFS 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=489633 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751
--- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov 2009-03-17 05:43:21
EDT ---
Notes:
> %patch0 -p1
Add postfix. E.g. you should invoke %patch in the following way:
%patch0 -p1 -b .some_descriptive_postfix
> dos2unix -k *.txt ChangeLog *.url LICENSE EXCEPTION
Consider using sed -i 's|\r||g' instead (just to avoid dos2unix as a BR).
> iconv -f latin1 -t utf-8 EXCEPTION > EXCEPTION.new
touch -r EXCEPTION EXCEPTION.new
mv -f EXCEPTION.new EXCEPTION
This piece of spec (and similar ones) is not fail-safe. You should change it to
something like this:
iconv -f latin1 -t utf-8 EXCEPTION > EXCEPTION.new && touch -r EXCEPTION
EXCEPTION.new && mv -f EXCEPTION.new EXCEPTION
Also, you should use some bash syntax sugar:
"mv -f EXCEPTION.new EXCEPTION" == "mv -f EXCEPTION{.new,}"
"touch -r EXCEPTION EXCEPTION.new" == "touch -r EXCEPTION{,.new}"
> %files
...
%{_libdir}/*.so
This is not a blocker, actually, but I believe, that dlopened objects should be
in a proper subdir in %_libdir (for example %{_libdir}/%{name} ). However,
there are many exceptions (unixODBC, tcl/tk among them), who stores their
*so-libraries in %_libdir.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 456190] Review Request: dosemu - dos emulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=456190
--- Comment #36 from Andrea Musuruane 2009-03-17 05:47:18
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> Andrea, do you happen to have an example of RPM_OPT flag? I cant find any
> reference how to use this, even from the kernel spec file.
Here you can find an introduction about CFLAGS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFLAGS
Fedora guidelines say that CFLAGS (or CXXFLAGS for C++ applications) must honor
the applicable compiler flags set in the system rpm configuration.
In practice, this means that $RPM_OPT_FLAGS or %{optflags} (they are the same)
must be the basis of the CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS actually used by the compiler during
the package build.
You can see the value of this macro with:
rpm --eval %{optflags}
You can see in the build process if these flags are used or not (now they are
not).
Hope this helps.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426753] Review Request: xmonad - A tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426753
--- Comment #25 from Jens Petersen 2009-03-17 04:47:16
EDT ---
Thanks for the update.
> Note that fileperms was fixed too. This is an issue that seems to be common to
> haskell things compiled in ghc, so we may want to fix this in the template.
You need to do that just for the bin file like I did with hscolour, not for all
files, like this:
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
%doc LICENSE
%attr(755,root,root) %{_bindir}/%{name}
Otherwise looks ok to me: I would like test it in rawhide and then do the final
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 484798] Review Request: xiphos - Bible study and research 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=484798 --- Comment #4 from Nils Philippsen 2009-03-17 05:24:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > Thank so much you for the detailed review. On the various issues raised, > upstream Developers have worked to clean up the code to now compile without > any > warning at all (they've also followed your advice and added -Werror to the > build flags). A new release is scheduled to come out shortly with this fixes > and others. Great! > On the licensing issue, I or other folks upstream can't find where > documentation differs from what's stated in the src files, they all seems to > say GPLv2+. Can you please point me to the documentation that states only > "GPLv2". Here: http://xiphos.org/manual/license and in help/xiphos.pdf in the source tarball (both mention version GPL v2, but not the option to use "any later version"). > Concerning the documentation license, I've been informed that the > documentation > is licensed under GFDL *without invariant* sections. Hence it's almost like > gpl > / CC by-at sh-al no-co. And that this should not be a problem since the worst > issue with GFDL are invariant sections. I don't have a problem with the license of the documentation, I'm not sure whether it should be mentioned in the spec file, though. > All the other editorial spec file issues have been taken care of too. Will > upload the new spec and srpm as soon as the new release becomes 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 486804] Review Request: libferrisloki - customized build of Loki library from Modern C++ Design for libferris
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486804
--- Comment #3 from Ben Martin 2009-03-17 05:48:25 EDT
---
Firstly, thank you for your indepth and very informative comments! A
few issues like not having split out a -devel package I forgot to do
before submitting and apologize for that.
I should mention up front that I've been using this spec on the
openSUSE build system (OBS) to make rpms for Fedora and openSUSE. If
possible I'd like to continue using the same spec in Fedora and in the
OBS to make openSUSE rpms too. I'm not sure if this is possible or
not, but I can always hope.
I've updated the spec file and src.rpm file with changes from your
comments. This should also make the next spec less of a hassle because
I'll have already addressed these comments.
> Might be that I've caught all issues, but a lot of work is needed to bring
> this
> into shape:
>
>
> * Run "rpmlint -i" on your src.rpm and also on all built packages. Try to fix
> as many Warnings and Errors as plausible.
>
There are still a few issues rpmlint picks up. The main one is how to
use multiple licenses properly.
>
> > License: GPL
>
> This is not just an invalid value for the "License" tag, it is inaccurate.
> Some
> source files mention "GPLv2+", some the "Boost Software License 1.0". Others
> contain a "Copyright Only" header:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/CopyrightOnly
> The "macros/ferrismacros.m4" file contains pieces licenced under the
> "LGPLv2+".
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing
OK, I've taken a look at these to see if I could consolidate things (if I owned
copyright on the file & code) but it looks like we'll need these three
liceneses
unless I plan to rewrite some already working code. So now we have:
License: LGPLv2+, Boost, Copyright only
I'm not sure how to chain them though. rpmlint doesn't seem to like comma
separated
and rpmbuild doesn't like multiple tags.
>
>
>
> > Source: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/witme/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2
>
> There are special guidelines for Sourceforge.net download locations:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net
Excellent. The above URL was one I came up with ages ago, though it is
surprisingly close to the Fedora recommendation. I've updated to fix
this inline with the URL above.
>
>
> > Packager: Ben Martin
>
> Don't set this tag. The build-system will do it. In general, be careful with
> hardcoding "Packager"/"Vendor" tags in spec files you release. There are
> people
> who build broken binary rpms, which would appear as if they have been built by
> you, because they contain your name in the "Packager" tag. The spec %changelog
> is less of a problem in case you wonder.
Removed. Though I also plan to try to use the same .spec with OBS to
make openSUSE rpms, so I might have to add it back conditionally.
>
>
> > BuildRequires: gcc-c++
>
> Redundant, as the C++ compiler is available in the minimal build environment:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Exceptions_2
Ah, if this redundancy is OK can we leave it? To build with OBS you
have to include the compiler too so I need that redundant line for the
spec to with on OBS too.
>
>
> > if [ "$SMP" != "" ]; then
> > (make "MAKE=make -k -j $SMP"; exit 0)
> > make
> > else
> > make
> > fi
>
> At least with Fedora, you can replace this with just:
>
> make %{?_smp_mflags}
>
Done. If openSUSE doesn't actually set _smp_mflags I might add some
glue in the header of the spec to set it properly on OBS.
>
> > %install
> > %makeinstall
>
> First command in %install section must be: rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
> (or "rm -rf %buildroot" if you prefer the lower case macro everywhere)
>
> make DESTDIR="$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" install
> or:
> make DESTDIR="$RPM_BUILD_ROOT" INSTALL="install -p"
>
> shall be preferred over %makeinstall.
This is one area where I thought using the macro was the golden thing
to do. Changed to the second version with the modification you
included.
>
>
> > %files
> > %defattr(-,root,root,0755)
>
> Doesn't %defattr(-,root,root,-) work?
>
> > %doc AUTHORS README COPYING ChangeLog INSTALL
>
> Typically, the standard file "INSTALL" is irrelevant to RPM package users.
> Here
> it is empty even.
Fixed.
>
> > %{_libdir}/*
> > %{_includedir}/*
>
> Package must be split into a main library pkg and a ferrisloki-devel
> sub-package, which contains the files needed only for software development
> (i.e. the *.so symlink and the headers).
>
> %{_libdir}/* includes too many files it must not include (e.g. the debuginfo
> files). Use at most %{_libdir}/*.so.* for the main pkg and %{_libdir}/*.so
> for the -devel subpkg.
>
>
> > -rw-r--r-- /usr/lib/libferrisloki.a
> > -rwxr-xr-x /usr/lib/libferrisloki.la
>
> Don't build/include these.
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Gu
[Bug 490491] Review Request: sysbench - System performance benchmark
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490491 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-17 05:52:37 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i386). koji Build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1245737 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 0820760bb16783ae51994aed794f952d sysbench-0.4.10.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Package installed successfully. + Not a GUI app. suggestions: 1) license looks to be GPLv2+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487713] Review Request: wcslib - An implementation of the FITS World Coordinate System 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=487713 Sergio Pascual changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Sergio Pascual 2009-03-17 05:54:38 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: wcslib Short Description: An implementation of the FITS World Coordinate System standard Owners: sergiopr Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490441] Review Request: hyphen-mn - Mongolian hyphenation rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490441 Caolan McNamara changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453847] Review Request: grid-packaging-tools - The Grid Packaging Tools (GPT)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453847 Mattias Ellert changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Mattias Ellert 2009-03-17 06:04:19 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: grid-packaging-tools Short Description: Grid Packaging Tools (GPT) Owners: ellert Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470066] Review Request: R-qtl - Quantitative trait loci (qtl) functionality for R
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470066 Mattias Ellert changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478767 --- Comment #34 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 05:58:10 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=335495) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=335495) Backtrace of a crash -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476622] Review Request: ocaml-pa-do - OCaml syntax extension for delimited overloading
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476622 --- Comment #15 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-03-17 06:18:22 EDT --- My fault for not testing this properly on OCaml 3.11 in Rawhide. The updated package below contains patches to fix the problems. There is still one test which fails, but I think it's a bug in camlp4. Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-pa-do.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-pa-do-0.8.4-3.fc11.src.rpm * Tue Mar 17 2009 Richard W.M. Jones - 0.8.4-3 - Patch module name which is illegal in OCaml 3.11. - Patch complex tests. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 477320] Review Request: ocaml-p3l - OCaml compiler for parallel programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477320 Richard W.M. Jones changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-03-17 06:19:38 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ocaml-p3l Short Description: OCaml compiler for parallel programs Owners: rjones Branches: F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #26 from nucleo 2009-03-17 06:32:08 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) So I can't commit any changes to the devel branch? cvs commit... Access denied: nucleo is not in ACL for rpms/knemo/devel (In reply to comment #25) When I run make build for F-10 I get: FAILED: BuildError: package knemo is blocked for tag dist-f10-updates-candidate http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1245742 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 455226] Review Request: php-pecl-runkit - PHP Opcode Analyser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455226 --- Comment #17 from Pavel Alexeev 2009-03-17 06:43:53 EDT --- Ok, ok, I rename xml-file again into php-pecl-runkit.xml. I can run test on php even 5.3 (from your repository ;) ), but I think included suite is very outdated, and not seen any passed tests. So, it is a main reason why I do not include in spec test phase. Set %defattr(-,root,root,-) (In reply to comment #15) > MUST : > make the %post/postun scriptlet silent It is done. BUT why??? I prefer see errors if it is present. It is also guarantee to fast bug-report if something will wrong on user system... In provided before link to Guidelines such scripts marked only as recommended, not mandatory. http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora9/php-pecl-runkit/php-pecl-runkit-0.9-10.CVS20090215.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478767] Review Request: spring - Realtime strategy game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478767
Alexey Torkhov changed:
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|ianwel...@gmail.com |atork...@gmail.com
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #35 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 06:01:11
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> (In reply to comment #32)
> > Other package are reviewed, would you like to finish this?
> You deserve candy. :)
Thanks for candy :)
Here is the last review:
+ rpmlint output without serious errors:
spring.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/spring/fonts/Luxi.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf
spring.x86_64: W: symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/spring/fonts/Luxi.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf
spring.x86_64: W: dangling-symlink /usr/share/spring/fonts/Vera.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf
spring.x86_64: W: symlink-should-be-relative /usr/share/spring/fonts/Vera.ttf
/usr/share/fonts/dejavu/DejaVuSans.ttf
spring.x86_64: E: invalid-soname /usr/lib64/libunitsync.so libunitsync.so
spring.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libunitsync.so
e...@glibc_2.2.5
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zIn.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zAlloc.h
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/LzmaDecode.h
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zHeader.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zIn.h
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zMethodID.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zItem.h
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zAlloc.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zDecode.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zItem.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zMethodID.h
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zExtract.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zCrc.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/LzmaDecode.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zHeader.h
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zBuffer.c
spring-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/spring_0.78.2.1/rts/lib/7zip/7zBuffer.h
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 22 warnings.
These should be fixed by using relative symlinks and changing permissions.
Other are safe to ignore.
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
+ File, containing the text of the licenses for the package is included in
%doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one primary architecture.
+ Architectures where package does not successfully compile, build or work are
listed in ExcludeArch.
Bugs should be filled against all 4 spring packages after their acceptance and
added to FE-ExcludeArch-ppc{,64} tracker:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Architecture_Build_Failures
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
+ No need to deal with locales.
+ Package does not store shared libraries.
+ The package does not designed to be relocatable.
+ A package owns all directories that it creates.
+ A package does not list a file more than once in the spec %files listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
+ Does not contain large documentation files.
+ Includes only doc files
[Bug 488908] Review Request: cpptest - A portable and powerful and simple unit testing framework for C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488908 --- Comment #2 from Rakesh Pandit 2009-03-17 07:11:32 EDT --- SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/cpptest.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/cpptest-1.1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm Fixed all issues and reported testsuite failure to 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 458180] Review Request: mailutils - Collection of GNU mail-related utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458180 Rakesh Pandit changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DEFERRED --- Comment #12 from Rakesh Pandit 2009-03-17 07:15:55 EDT --- I am not interested taking it up soon. Will take it up sometime again if not taken up by somebody before me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490491] Review Request: sysbench - System performance benchmark
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490491 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Xavier Bachelot 2009-03-17 07:38:08 EDT --- Thanks for the review, I'll fix the license before building. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sysbench Short Description: System performance benchmark Owners: xavierb Branches: F-9 F-10 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489795] Review Request: backintime - Simple backup system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489795 --- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert 2009-03-17 06:51:39 EDT --- Please update to 0.9.16.1 and I will review it. --- Comment #2 from Christoph Wickert 2009-03-17 07:02:02 EDT --- Please update to 0.9.16.1 and I will review 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 489795] Review Request: backintime - Simple backup system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489795 --- Comment #1 from Christoph Wickert 2009-03-17 06:51:39 EDT --- Please update to 0.9.16.1 and I will review it. --- Comment #2 from Christoph Wickert 2009-03-17 07:02:02 EDT --- Please update to 0.9.16.1 and I will review 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 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751
Alexey Torkhov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co
||m)
--- Comment #3 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 07:12:04
EDT ---
Spec URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks.spec
SRPM URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks-0.8.7686-2.fc10.src.rpm
* Tue Mar 17 2009 Alexey Torkhov - 0.8.7686-3
- Add patch backups
- Simplify scripts a bit
- Move libs to -libs subpackage to ensure better work in multilib environment
- Cleanier remove-smpeg patch
(In reply to comment #2)
> > %patch0 -p1
>
> Add postfix. E.g. you should invoke %patch in the following way:
>
> %patch0 -p1 -b .some_descriptive_postfix
I'm wondering why those backups are needed? I never found it useful.
Anyway, fixed.
> > dos2unix -k *.txt ChangeLog *.url LICENSE EXCEPTION
>
> Consider using sed -i 's|\r||g' instead (just to avoid dos2unix as a BR).
No, I don't want to do it. Dos2unix is tiny and useful. Otherwise, I had to do
touch to save timestamps.
> > iconv -f latin1 -t utf-8 EXCEPTION > EXCEPTION.new
> touch -r EXCEPTION EXCEPTION.new
> mv -f EXCEPTION.new EXCEPTION
>
> This piece of spec (and similar ones) is not fail-safe. You should change it
> to something like this:
>
> iconv -f latin1 -t utf-8 EXCEPTION > EXCEPTION.new && touch -r EXCEPTION
> EXCEPTION.new && mv -f EXCEPTION.new EXCEPTION
Those pieces are equivalent, as script are executed under -e shell option and
it will exit after first command that fails.
> Also, you should use some bash syntax sugar:
>
> "mv -f EXCEPTION.new EXCEPTION" == "mv -f EXCEPTION{.new,}"
> "touch -r EXCEPTION EXCEPTION.new" == "touch -r EXCEPTION{,.new}"
Fixed.
> > %files
> ...
> %{_libdir}/*.so
>
> This is not a blocker, actually, but I believe, that dlopened objects should
> be in a proper subdir in %_libdir (for example %{_libdir}/%{name} ). However,
> there are many exceptions (unixODBC, tcl/tk among them), who stores their
> *so-libraries in %_libdir.
Actually, that is how it is made now - btanks and bted are linked against libs
under %{_libdir} (check ldd), but dlopen'ed libbt_objects plugin is in
%{_libdir}/%{name}.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489795] Review Request: backintime - Simple backup system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489795 --- Comment #3 from Simon Wesp 2009-03-17 07:50:33 EDT --- done SPEC: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/backintime-0.9.16.1/backintime.spec SRPM: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/backintime-0.9.16.1/backintime-0.9.16.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Thank you Christoph -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481695] Review Request: python-TraitsBackendQt - PyQt backend for Traits and TraitsGUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481695 Rakesh Pandit changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #4 from Rakesh Pandit 2009-03-17 07:58:40 EDT --- http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/python-TraitsBackendQt.spec http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/python-TraitsBackendQt-3.0.3-4.fc10.src.rpm Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481738] Review Request: python-EnthoughtBase - Core package for the Enthought Tool Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481738 --- Comment #4 from Rakesh Pandit 2009-03-17 08:18:42 EDT --- http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/srpm/python-EnthoughtBase-3.0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/spec/python-EnthoughtBase.spec Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483543] Review Request: systemtapguiserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543 --- Comment #13 from Anithra 2009-03-17 08:25:40 EDT --- Thanks Will, Updated spec and src rpm: Spec URL: http://nchc.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/stapgui/systemtapguiserver.spec SRPM URL: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/stapgui/systemtapguiserver-1.0-6.src.rpm I've removed the empty files, and INSTALL and COPYING. They were created cos i had used automake to create makefile.in, I agree the sleep(1) doesn't look too good, its a stop gap solution , added it after there were some sync issues. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459925] Review Request: libowfat - Reimplementation of libdjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459925 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||Reopened Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|WONTFIX | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459925] Review Request: libowfat - Reimplementation of libdjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459925 --- Comment #1 from Simon Wesp 2009-03-17 08:30:07 EDT --- New upstream release SPEC: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libowfat-0.28/libowfat.spec SRPM: http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libowfat-0.28/libowfat-0.28-1.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459925] Review Request: libowfat - Reimplementation of libdjb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459925 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751 --- Comment #4 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 08:34:39 EDT --- Spec URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks.spec SRPM URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks-0.8.7686-4.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Mar 17 2009 Alexey Torkhov - 0.8.7686-4 - Split data to subpackage instead of libs Also, running ldconfig. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #27 from Steven M. Parrish 2009-03-17 08:43:34 EDT --- Nucleo, you need to go to https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/knemo login with your fas username and request the ACLs for the F9 and devel branches. You want to request all 4 as the commaintainer. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #28 from Itamar Reis Peixoto 2009-03-17 08:50:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #26) (In reply to comment #27) please hold, the ACLS are ok, but the package for F-10 is locked unlock requested at -> https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/1386 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #29 from Itamar Reis Peixoto 2009-03-17 08:55:08 EDT --- ticket 1386 closed as fixed in rel-eng, please try to build again within 1 hour and if not work post a message it's possible to build for devel and F-9 too ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490638] New: Review Request: b43-tools - Tools for the Broadcom 43xx series WLAN chip
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: b43-tools - Tools for the Broadcom 43xx series WLAN chip https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490638 Summary: Review Request: b43-tools - Tools for the Broadcom 43xx series WLAN chip Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lemen...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/b43-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/b43-tools-0-0.1.git20090125.fc10.src.rpm Description: Tools for the Broadcom 43xx series WLAN chip. This package is a requirement for building opensource firmware for bcm43xx-based wi-fi modules. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470703] Review Request: links 2 - text mode browser with graphics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470703 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk 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 470696] Review Request: rubygem-passenger - Passenger Ruby on Rails deployment system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696 --- Comment #24 from Jeroen van Meeuwen 2009-03-17 09:33:28 EDT --- I'll explain my plan a little further because it may be a little controversial. Since this package is a little hard to package (with or without mod_passenger), I was thinking I could ship rubygem-passenger, and out-comment all the parts that have to do with mod_passenger (and thus not ship, compile or include mod_passenger itself, just the .spec semantics, out-commented). That way, downstream users that want mod_passenger can derive from the .spec and .srpm already in Fedora. However, my primary concern is that we would be shipping an intolerable SRPM (since the conflicting licenses prevent the sources from being shipped together as one). Could you let me know what you think? Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #30 from nucleo 2009-03-17 09:42:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #27) Thanks. I request the ACLs for the F9 and devel branches. (In reply to comment #29) Builds for F-10 and devel are successful http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1245912 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1245962 But build for F-9 with error: BuildError: package knemo is blocked for tag dist-f9-updates-candidate http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1245980 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 470703] Review Request: links 2 - text mode browser with graphics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470703
--- Comment #16 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-03-17 09:46:36 EDT
---
0.) links or links2?
#Issue:
# There is a symlink in /usr/bin/links to elinks if that package is installed
# Should this package use links2 or should I modify elinks to remove the links
# symlink from elinks
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_bindir}/links $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_bindir}/links2
mv $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_mandir}/man1/links.1
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_mandir}/man1/links2.1
Upstream decided to call this "links", not "links2" and changing it needs
careful consideration. I'm all for fixing elinks package not to call its binary
"links" but "elinks", but given this might be controversial and you've
discussed it before I won't block the review for this, but leave the choice up
to you.
When it comes to consistency with other distributors, all operating systems
I've used called the links or links 2 binary "links" (well, Slackware and
NetBSD/pkgsrc).
1.) Sources
Source2:%{name}.png
Isn't links_32x32.xpm included in the distribution tarball sufficient? If it
really isn't, include full URL here, or comment on how did you obtain this
file.
2.) Summary contains application name
Summary:Links is a web browser running in both graphics and text mode
Please remove "Links is a".
3.) Description.
The focus on intuitive usability makes it suitable as a web
browser for low-end terminals in libraries, Internet cafes etc
This is a joke, right? :)
Seriously, would you install links in an Internet cafe?
Please try to make description more helpful to casual user.
4.) Don't silence make. Its output is useful.
make %{?_smp_mflags} -s
Remove -s
5.) Redundant arguments to %configure
--bindir=%{_bindir} --mandir=%{_mandir}
These are useless, %configure already expands to them. See:
rpm --eval %configure
6.) Icon directory
%files
%{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/48x48/apps
Why do you put the icon here, and own just this directory?
You don't seem to depend on anything that would own %{_datadir}/icons.
Wouldn't /usr/share/pixmaps be a better choice?
7.) Features
You're missing certain features lot of people will find useful:
SSL support:NO
Links 2 looks for OpenSSL, but openssl-devel is not BuildRequired.
Given Links is distributed under the terms of GPLv2+, you will need exception
from GPL for this from Links upstream. Alternatively, you can use
nss_compat_ossl (patch is already in elinks repository, you
may want to adapt it). See:
http://www.gnome.org/~markmc/openssl-and-the-gpl.html
Graphics drivers: FB
No X? I'd say X11 is quite popular these days :) Please BuildRequire
libX11-devel
8.) Compile-time warnings
You get a _LOT_ of "pointer targets differ in signedness" warnings. Please
notify upstream.
9.) Desktop entry
Name=glinks
Please replace this with something more meanungful, such as "Links Web Browser"
Comment=Text mode browser with graphics
This is self-contradictory.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #31 from nucleo 2009-03-17 09:55:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #30) I have problem with devel build, http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1245962 this build without my commit. With commit I have problem when I run make tag: cvs tag: Pre-tag check failed cvs [tag aborted]: correct the above errors first! make: *** [tag] Error 1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480855] Review Request: bournal - Write personal, password-protected journal entries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480855 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cassmod...@fedoraproject.or ||g --- Comment #1 from Simon Wesp 2009-03-17 10:01:00 EDT --- what a fortuitousness, all packages i want to package is already packed by fab :-p version 1.3 is available vim vs. nano mh, perhaps you should choose one, and add in the description that it will be worked with the other.. but its a console editor, so this will not be an issue. please update to v. 1.3 and i will take a deeper look and review 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 473037] Review Request: tinycc - Tiny C Compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473037 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lkund...@v3.sk Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #19 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-03-17 10:07:08 EDT --- 1.) devel subpackage Why does this have a devel subpackage, and not just everything in one package? I'd say compilers are used exclusively for development. 2.) You don't install shared libraries %post -p /sbin/ldconfig %postun -p /sbin/ldconfig This is not needed 3.) License Most files are LGPLv2+, libtcc1.c is GPLv2+ with linking exception. Therefore the right license tag should probably be: License: LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+ with exceptions 4.) libtcc (In reply to comment #18) [...] > IMO, this begs for more questions: > * Is /usr/lib/libtcc.a located correctly? > Should it be a generally applicable library (e.g. usable by GCC compiled > files) > then this location is likely correct. > > * Is /usr/include/libtcc.h located correctly? > I doubt it. IMO, it should be a tcc internal header, tcc should implicitly > pull > in interally from some internal include file search path. libtcc is not used internally. It's a compiler library that allows you to embed C compiler in your programs. Therefore libtcc should be compiled dynamically, not statically. Also, guidelines for -devel packages would apply here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473037] Review Request: tinycc - Tiny C Compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473037 --- Comment #20 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-03-17 10:08:43 EDT --- Please note that once you make libtcc a dynamic library, 2.) would no longer apply. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 473037] Review Request: tinycc - Tiny C Compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=473037 --- Comment #21 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-03-17 10:10:15 EDT --- 5.) Compiler flags use gcc -O2 -Wall -c -o libtcc1.o libtcc1.c gcc -O2 -Wall -c -o bcheck.o bcheck.c Why aren't optflags used here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484933] Review Request: libwps - Library for reading and converting Microsoft Works word processor documents
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484933 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 10:09:37 EDT --- libwps-0.1.2-5.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libwps-0.1.2-5.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 470703] Review Request: links 2 - text mode browser with graphics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470703 --- Comment #17 from Ondrej Vasik 2009-03-17 10:13:15 EDT --- Ad 0) I would say the best way would be to have links2 binary as the default in that package and elinks/links2.X/(possibly links v1.X in future) could share for /usr/bin/links (elinks has it's binary named elinks, /usr/bin/links is just compat symlink) via alternatives (to make it easier for users) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483615] Review Request: CodeAnalyst-gui - Performance Analysis Suite for AMD-based System (based on Oprofile)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483615
William Cohen changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||wco...@redhat.com
--- Comment #41 from William Cohen 2009-03-17 10:22:57 EDT
---
Code Analyst currently only builds on x86 platforms and only supports AMD
processors. This is overly restrictive. Both Fedora and OProfile supports a
number of processors architectures. It would be very nice if the Code Analyst
was a bit more flexible and would allow other developers to adapt it those
processor architectures AMD doesn't support. At the very least should be able
to fall back on the oprofile timer mechanism for unknown processors
architectures.
There appears to be a few places with __asm__ code used to either read the
timestamp counter or get the cpuid that would prevent the code from compiling
on non-x86 processors.
$ find -type f -exec grep "__asm__" {} /dev/null \;|more
./src/ca/example/example.cpp: __asm__ __volatile__ (
./src/ca/example/example.cpp: __asm__ __volatile__ (
./src/ca/example/example.cpp: __asm__ __volatile__ (
./src/ca/example/example.cpp: __asm__ __volatile__ (
./src/ca/gui/auxil.cpp: __asm__ __volatile__ (
./src/ca/libs/libca/xpwin.cpp: __asm__ __volatile__ (
./src/ca/libs/libca/xpwin.cpp: __asm__ __volatile__ (
These operations could be factored out and converted into defines located in an
include file.
Is the cpuid being used for anything more complicated than just getting the
model and family? Could most of this information be easily obtained from
oprofile's /dev/oprofile/cpu_type or /proc/cpuinfo?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751 --- Comment #5 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 10:31:46 EDT --- Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1246013 Spec URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks.spec SRPM URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks-0.8.7686-5.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Mar 17 2009 Alexey Torkhov - 0.8.7686-5 - Add license for libraries -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #32 from nucleo 2009-03-17 10:49:32 EDT --- (In reply to comment #29) Thanks. Now all builds for F-9, F-10 and devel are completed successfully. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1246036 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1246075 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1246089 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751
Peter Lemenkov changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co |
|m) |
--- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov 2009-03-17 11:16:15
EDT ---
Please, fix - use full patch for Source0.
REVIEW:
- rpmlint is not silent:
[pe...@host-12-116 Desktop]$ rpmlint btanks-*rpm
btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libclunk.so
btanks.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libclunk.so e...@glibc_2.0
btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libsdlx.so
btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libbt.so
btanks.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libbt.so e...@glibc_2.0
btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libmrt.so
btanks-data.i386: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
[pe...@host-12-116 Desktop]$
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines .
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines .
+ The License field in the package spec file matchуы the actual license.
+ The text of the license(s) is included in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[pe...@host-12-116 Desktop]$ md5sum btanks-0.8.7686.tar.bz2*
f5e4076e8562f4ad54fefeceaa37870d btanks-0.8.7686.tar.bz2
f5e4076e8562f4ad54fefeceaa37870d btanks-0.8.7686.tar.bz2.from_srpm
[pe...@host-12-116 Desktop]$
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
+ The package calls ldconfig in %post and %postun.
+ A package owns all directories that it creates.
+ Doesn't contain files, listed more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissable content.
+ No large documentation files
+ Everything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
+ No header files
+ No static libraries
+ No pkgconfig(.pc) files
+ The package does not contain any .la libtool archives
+ The package includes a %{name}.desktop file
- The %{name}.desktop file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install
in the %install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI application does
not need a .desktop file, you must put a comment in the spec file with your
explanation.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [25]
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Ok, here are my final notes:
* please fix Source0,
* fix spec to properly install desktop-file
* please, comment the above rpmlint warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487097] Review Request: ReviewBoard - web based code review 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=487097 Dave Malcolm changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalc...@redhat.com --- Comment #4 from Dave Malcolm 2009-03-17 11:18:59 EDT --- There's already a separate review for django-evolution, in APPROVED state: see bug 488103. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 11:23:47 EDT --- knemo-0.5.1-4.fc10.1 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/knemo-0.5.1-4.fc10.1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 11:25:23 EDT --- knemo-0.5.1-4.fc9.1 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/knemo-0.5.1-4.fc9.1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490400] Review Request: perl-HTML-Strip - Perl extension for stripping HTML markup from text
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490400 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 11:29:01 EDT --- perl-HTML-Strip-1.06-1.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-HTML-Strip-1.06-1.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 488103] Review Request: django-evolution - Schema evolution for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488103 Jon Stanley changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||487097 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490400] Review Request: perl-HTML-Strip - Perl extension for stripping HTML markup from text
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490400 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 11:28:55 EDT --- perl-HTML-Strip-1.06-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-HTML-Strip-1.06-1.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 487097] Review Request: ReviewBoard - web based code review 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=487097 Jon Stanley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jonstan...@gmail.com Depends on||488103 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490400] Review Request: perl-HTML-Strip - Perl extension for stripping HTML markup from text
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490400 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751 Alexey Torkhov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co ||m) --- Comment #7 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 11:46:03 EDT --- Spec URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks.spec SRPM URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks-0.8.7686-6.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Mar 17 2009 Alexey Torkhov - 0.8.7686-6 - Fixed source url - Properly installing desktop files > - rpmlint is not silent: > btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libclunk.so > btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libsdlx.so > btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libbt.so > btanks.i386: W: no-soname /usr/lib/libmrt.so Those libraries are unversioned and thus are missing soname. > btanks.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libclunk.so e...@glibc_2.0 > btanks.i386: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib/libbt.so e...@glibc_2.0 Eh... that is how those libraries are written upstream. > btanks-data.i386: W: no-documentation No need to duplicate documentation in subpackage. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467154] Review Request: libvirt-qpid - An interface with libvirt using QMF (qpid modeling framework) which utilizes the Advanced Message Queuing protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467154 Ian Main changed: What|Removed |Added Group|redhat, fedora_contrib | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 457279] Review Request: cerebro - Cerebro provides mesh network services and presence information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457279 --- Comment #22 from Polychronis Ypodimatopoulos 2009-03-17 11:54:11 EDT --- Hi - here is the spec and SRPM files of the latest version: http://dev.laptop.org/~ypod/releases/SPECS/cerebro.spec http://dev.laptop.org/~ypod/releases/SRPMS/cerebro-3.0.6-1.olpc3.src.rpm thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488407] Review Request: python-text_table - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488407 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 11:56:06 EDT --- python-text_table-0.02-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-text_table-0.02-2.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 488407] Review Request: python-text_table - Simple Eyecandy ASCII Tables
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488407 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 11:56:00 EDT --- python-text_table-0.02-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-text_table-0.02-2.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751 --- Comment #8 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 11:55:51 EDT --- Spec URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks.spec SRPM URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks-0.8.7686-7.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Mar 17 2009 Alexey Torkhov - 0.8.7686-7 - Add forgotten desktop-file-utils build requires -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751 --- Comment #9 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 12:03:50 EDT --- Spec URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks.spec SRPM URL: http://atorkhov.fedorapeople.org/btanks-0.8.7686-7.fc10.src.rpm * Tue Mar 17 2009 Alexey Torkhov - 0.8.7686-7 - Add forgotten desktop-file-utils build requires - Fixing bad BuildRoot -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481695] Review Request: python-TraitsBackendQt - PyQt backend for Traits and TraitsGUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481695 Jochen Schmitt changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-03-17 12:02:03 EDT --- Good: + Egg-info directory was deleted. *** 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 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(lemen...@gmail.co | |m) | --- Comment #10 from Peter Lemenkov 2009-03-17 12:07:36 EDT --- Ok, all issues mentioned above, has been resolved (or, at least, commented), so this package is APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481738] Review Request: python-EnthoughtBase - Core package for the Enthought Tool Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481738 --- Comment #5 from Jochen Schmitt 2009-03-17 12:09:00 EDT --- Good: + License tag contains proper value + Egg-info directory was deleted + html.zip was uncompressed and included into the %doc stanza Bad: - Demo application fails to run s logger_demo_app]$ python demo.py Traceback (most recent call last): File "demo.py", line 6, in from enthought.envisage.ui.workbench.api import WorkbenchApplication ImportError: No module named envisage.ui.workbench.api -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467154] Review Request: libvirt-qpid - An interface with libvirt using QMF (qpid modeling framework) which utilizes the Advanced Message Queuing protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467154 --- Comment #17 from Ian Main 2009-03-17 12:13:37 EDT --- OK, I've reset to public bug (I don't know why it wasn't before), and I am now in the packager group. Yes it is my first package :). Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489751] Review Request: btanks - Funny battle game with tanks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489751 Alexey Torkhov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Alexey Torkhov 2009-03-17 12:19:22 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: btanks Short Description: Funny battle game with tanks Owners: atorkhov Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426753] Review Request: xmonad - A tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426753 --- Comment #26 from Yaakov Nemoy 2009-03-17 12:33:40 EDT --- New update SPEC: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/xmonad.spec SRPM: http://ynemoy.fedorapeople.org/review/xmonad-0.8.1-5.fc10.src.rpm Note to self defattr != attr :P -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476622] Review Request: ocaml-pa-do - OCaml syntax extension for delimited overloading
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476622 --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-03-17 12:36:32 EDT --- Just to be sure, are you expecting six failures in the op_concrete test? I'm not sure if your above comment expects a single failure, or some number of failures in a single test group. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 467154] Review Request: libvirt-qpid - An interface with libvirt using QMF (qpid modeling framework) which utilizes the Advanced Message Queuing protocol
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467154 Ian Main changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486390] Review Request: simspark - Spark physical simulation system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486390 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 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 481034] Review Request: coccinelle - Semantic patching for Linux (spatch)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481034 Michal Schmidt changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #20 from Michal Schmidt 2009-03-17 12:44:26 EDT --- OK: rpmlint was run and its output discussed. OK: Package name meets the Package Naming Guidelines. OK: The *.spec file name matches the package name. OK: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines: OK: naming OK: version and release OK: licensing OK: no pre-built binaries OK: spec is legible OK: builds on all archs OK: FHS layout OK: changelogs OK: tags OK: BuildRoot tag OK: clean buildroot in %install and %clean OK: Requires OK: BuildRequires OK: summary and description OK: encoding OK: documentation N/A: compiler flags (program written in OCaml) N/A: debuginfo (program written in OCaml) N/A: devel packages OK: requiring base package N/A: shared libraries (dllpycaml_stubs.so is not a normal library) OK: no static libraries OK: no duplication of system libraries OK: rpath deleted N/A: config files N/A: initscripts N/A: desktop files OK: macros N/A: locale files OK: timestamps OK: parallel make not used for a reason N/A: scriptlets N/A: conditional deps OK: non-relocatable package OK: file and directory ownership N/A: users and groups N/A: web apps OK: no conflicts OK: no kernel modules OK: nothing in /srv OK: not bundling multiple projects !!! BAD !!!: Patch0 has no comment about its purpose and upstream status. OCaml-specific guidelines: OK: binary stripped, bytecode not stripped OK: compiled binary prefered to bytecode OK: tests for native compiler OK: Meets Licensing Guidelines. OK: License (GPLv2) tag matches the actual license. OK: The license file included in %doc. OK: Spec file written in American English. OK: Source matches upstream. sha1sum: 3457c54a8e13e129a1c514debd6c9e7d41abf9d9 coccinelle-0.1.5.tgz OK: Builds in Koji on all archs. OK: No duplicates in %files. OK: File permissions correct, defattr used properly. OK: Code or permissable content. OK: Large documentation in a separate subpackage. OK: Program works even without %doc. N/A: Headers in -devel. N/A: pkconfig files. N/A: Library with a suffix. OK: Subpackages require the base package using full-versioned dependencies. OK: No .la files. OK: Does not own files or dirs already owned by other packages. OK: Filenames are valid UTF-8. Summary: Please add a comment for Patch0 explaining why the patch is needed and what its upstream status is. The Packaging Guidelines recommend using *-doc as the documentation package name. Yours is named *-docs. Consider changing it. *-docs is not unusual, but *-doc is a bit more common: yum list \*-doc | wc -l 177 yum list \*-docs | wc -l 69 None of these two issues are blockers and they are easy to fix before you import to CVS. I approve the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476622] Review Request: ocaml-pa-do - OCaml syntax extension for delimited overloading
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476622 --- Comment #17 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-03-17 12:49:51 EDT --- Was hoping not to get any failures at all :-) But yes at the moment it's 6 failures: +Group: Concrete syntax tests +Group: Simple concrete syntax tests +Test: /+/ File "op_concrete.ml", line 12, characters 29-50: Test: while executing camlp4, the following error was encountered: Parse error: [relative_precedence] expected after [associativity] (in [pa_infix_declaration]) +Test: /*/ File "op_concrete.ml", line 22, characters 29-50: Test: while executing camlp4, the following error was encountered: Parse error: [implem] expected after [semi] (in [implem]) +Group: Alphabetic operators. +Test: o File "op_concrete.ml", line 36, characters 36-53: Test: while executing camlp4, the following error was encountered: Parse error: [implem] expected after [semi] (in [implem]) +Test: plus File "op_concrete.ml", line 41, characters 35-58: Test: while executing camlp4, the following error was encountered: Parse error: [implem] expected after [semi] (in [implem]) +Test: subset File "op_concrete.ml", line 46, characters 35-62: Test: while executing camlp4, the following error was encountered: Parse error: [implem] expected after [semi] (in [implem]) +Test: incr File "op_concrete.ml", line 51, characters 36-54: Test: while executing camlp4, the following error was encountered: Parse error: [implem] expected after [semi] (in [implem]) 6 tests failed on 14. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #35 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 12:54:54 EDT --- knemo-0.5.1-5.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/knemo-0.5.1-5.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 487791] Review Request: knemo - KDE4 network monitoring 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=487791 --- Comment #36 from Fedora Update System 2009-03-17 13:00:04 EDT --- knemo-0.5.1-5.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/knemo-0.5.1-5.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481034] Review Request: coccinelle - Semantic patching for Linux (spatch)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481034 --- Comment #21 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-03-17 13:09:17 EDT --- Thanks Michal. I'll make the changes you suggest. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna 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=476720 --- Comment #14 from Ankur Sinha 2009-03-17 13:14:53 EDT --- hi, made the changes : http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/beteckna-0.3/beteckna-fonts.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/beteckna-0.3/beteckna-fonts-0.3-4.fc10.src.rpm tested the srpm using mock.. all processes returned 0 so im assuming it was a successful build.. regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481034] Review Request: coccinelle - Semantic patching for Linux (spatch)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481034 Richard W.M. Jones changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-03-17 13:13:06 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: coccinelle Short Description: Semantic patching for Linux (spatch) Owners: rjones Branches: F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476720] Review Request: beteckna-sfd-fonts - Beteckna 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=476720 --- Comment #15 from Ankur Sinha 2009-03-17 13:28:39 EDT --- hi, i got these in the output though.. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph igrave has width 207 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of dotlessi which is 186. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph iacute has width 207 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of dotlessi which is 186. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph icircumflex has width 207 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of dotlessi which is 186. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph idieresis has width 207 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of dotlessi which is 186. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph Agrave has width 695 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of A which is 674. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph Aring has width 695 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of A which is 674. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph Egrave has width 518 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of E which is 483. DEBUG: Bad sfd file. Glyph aring has width 476 even though it should be DEBUG: bound to the width of a which is 480. How do i handle these? Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481738] Review Request: python-EnthoughtBase - Core package for the Enthought Tool Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481738 --- Comment #6 from Rakesh Pandit 2009-03-17 13:29:57 EDT --- It seems to me these all test cases are wrongly written and whole stack seems to have a circular dependency ... I wouldn't been able to investigate much until next week. Am on holidays -- Thanks -- Will update next week for sure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 481695] Review Request: python-TraitsBackendQt - PyQt backend for Traits and TraitsGUI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481695 Rakesh Pandit changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Rakesh Pandit 2009-03-17 13:33:08 EDT --- Thank you for quickly looking into it. ;) New Package CVS Request === Package Name: python-TraitsBackendQt Short Description:PyQt backend for Traits and TraitsGUI Owners: rakesh Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490704] New: Review Request: mingw32-liboil - MinGW Windows liboil library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mingw32-liboil - MinGW Windows liboil library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490704 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-liboil - MinGW Windows liboil library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lfar...@lfarkas.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.lfarkas.org/linux/packages/centos/5/SPECS/mingw32-liboil.spec SRPM URL: http://www.lfarkas.org/linux/packages/centos/5/SRPMS/mingw32-liboil-0.3.15-1.src.rpm Description: MinGW Windows liboil library Approved packaging guidelines for MinGW are here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/MinGW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490722] New: Review Request: R-BSgenome - Infrastructure for Biostrings-based genome data packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: R-BSgenome - Infrastructure for Biostrings-based genome data packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490722 Summary: Review Request: R-BSgenome - Infrastructure for Biostrings-based genome data packages Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pin...@pingoured.fr QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-BSgenome.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-BSgenome-1.10.5-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Infrastructure shared by all the Biostrings-based genome data packages -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490721] New: Review Request: R-Biostrings - String objects representing biological sequences
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: R-Biostrings - String objects representing biological sequences https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490721 Summary: Review Request: R-Biostrings - String objects representing biological sequences Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pin...@pingoured.fr QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-Biostrings.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-Biostrings-2.10.21-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Memory efficient string containers, string matching algorithms, and other utilities, for fast manipulation of large biological sequences or set of sequences. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490724] New: Review Request: R-RUnit - R Unit test framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: R-RUnit - R Unit test framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490724 Summary: Review Request: R-RUnit - R Unit test framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pin...@pingoured.fr QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-RUnit.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/R-RUnit-0.4.21-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: R functions implementing a standard Unit Testing framework, with additional code inspection and report generation tools -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
