[Bug 491268] New: Review Request: perl-autodie - Replace functions with equivalents which succeed or die
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-autodie - Replace functions with equivalents which succeed or die Alias: perl-autodie https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491268 Summary: Review Request: perl-autodie - Replace functions with equivalents which succeed or die Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/autodie OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-autodie.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-autodie-1.999-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: bIlujDI' yIchegh()Qo'; yIHegh()! It is better to die() than to return() in failure. -- Klingon programming proverb. The autodie pragma provides a convenient way to replace functions that normally return false on failure with equivalents that throw an exception on failure. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1250698 Additional Comment: Due to current @INC ordering, at the moment this will only work properly in rawhide. perl-autodie is a prereq of perl-Git-CPAN-Patch. *rt-0.05 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475322] Review Request: genus2reduction - Computes Reductions of Genus 2 Proper Smooth Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475322 Conrad Meyer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #12 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-20 02:20:51 EDT --- Imported and built in rawhide. Closing. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1250744 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491240] Review Request: dropwatch - monitor for dropped network packets in the kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491240 --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-20 01:03:25 EDT --- missing BR:readline-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490562] Review Request: renameutils - A set of programs to make renaming of files easier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490562 Michael Ploujnikov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Michael Ploujnikov 2009-03-19 23:18:01 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: renameutils Short Description: A set of programs to make renaming and copying of files easier Owners: plouj 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 491029] Review Request: perl-Data-Denter - An alternative to Data::Dumper and Storable
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491029 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:12:15 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460111] Review Request: perl-Data-ICal - Generates iCalendar (RFC 2445) calendar files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460111 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:13:56 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453848] Review Request: globus-core - Globus Toolkit - Globus Core
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453848 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ Bug 453848 depends on bug 453847, which changed state. Bug 453847 Summary: Review Request: grid-packaging-tools - The Grid Packaging Tools (GPT) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453847 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #18 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:10:01 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 460107] Review Request: perl-Text-vFile-asData - Parse vFile formatted files into data structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=460107 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:13:04 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:11:06 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480235] Review Request: subtitlecomposer - A text-based subtitles editor for KDE.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480235 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:01:34 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491097] Review Request: hyphen-fa - Farsi 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=491097 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:00:36 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484363] Review Request: ggz-base-libs - Base libraries for GGZ gaming zone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484363 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:02:45 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 22:59:12 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490832] Review Request: hyphen-ia - Interlingua 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=490832 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 23:00:03 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490520] Review Request: ioport - Access I/O ports
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490520 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 22:55:42 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490397] Review Request: gmime22 - Library for creating and parsing MIME messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490397 Bernard Johnson 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 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 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 22:53:30 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490397] Review Request: gmime22 - Library for creating and parsing MIME messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490397 --- Comment #24 from Bernard Johnson 2009-03-19 22:51:50 EDT --- built in rawhide -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487901] Review Request: zikula - web-based CMS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487901 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 22:52:24 EDT --- You may want to ping dwalsh and just get the selinux changes you need made to the policy. cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490318] Review Request: frescobaldi - Edit LilyPond sheet music with ease!
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490318 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 22:49:22 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398
--- Comment #27 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 22:36:56 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #26)
> 1. fix the SONAME issues. Perhaps check with Debian's package of eclib to see
> how they are doing it, so we can be consistent. One of the problems is that
> upstream doesn't maintain a stable API/ABI.
The latest spec is an attempt at that -- the SONAME for each library is set to
"lib.so.%{version}".
> 2. move the libraries to the standard location (I believe this was fixed in
> the
> last version)
Yep, that was fixed.
> 3. implement "make check". disable the tests that fail for the moment and
> report them to upstream so they can be fixed in a later release (hopefully
> they
> will tell us which one's are expected to work and not work).
That was done in the last version also (except all tests are disabled). How do
you want me to disable just the failing 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 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398 --- Comment #26 from Alex Lancaster 2009-03-19 22:03:20 EDT --- Gentlemen, yes, let's keep the focus on the review. I agree with most of the issues Michael raised. However, I also think Conrad is doing his best and may have misinterpreted Michael's initial terseness as rudeness, although it wasn't intended that way. These issues aren't as well documented on the wiki and in the packaging guidelines as they could be, so I can understand the confusion. (I'm still learning about some of the more subtle issues with dynamic linking myself). In any case, as I am still the reviewer, here are the things I think still need fixing: 1. fix the SONAME issues. Perhaps check with Debian's package of eclib to see how they are doing it, so we can be consistent. One of the problems is that upstream doesn't maintain a stable API/ABI. 2. move the libraries to the standard location (I believe this was fixed in the last version) 3. implement "make check". disable the tests that fail for the moment and report them to upstream so they can be fixed in a later release (hopefully they will tell us which one's are expected to work and not work). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147 --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19 22:03:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > Turns out, those translations aren't entirely useful, unless kde-l10n-pt is > installed, which owns said symlink. Well, I already examined what package owns /usr/share/doc/HTML/pt/common by repoquery, but no package is returned (please see the filed bug 491247) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||491247 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490576] Review Request: bibtex2html - Collection of tools for translating from BibTeX to HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490576 --- Comment #9 from Guido Grazioli 2009-03-19 21:54:06 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > The hevea package is not available for ppc64 because of problems with > > ocaml; i > > could copy the ExclusiveArch directive from hevea.spec (i already checked > > building of that package fails on ppc64), but i preferred to include > > conditionals > > %ifnarch to build html manual for archs other than ppc64 only (and provide > > just manual.ps for ppc64). The wiki doesnt seem to specify which way would > > fit > > best. > > OK, sounds reasonable. Did you test the build process to work on ppc64 now? I > believe it will fail since hevea is not available and make doc tries to build > the html file too.. No, because: %ifnarch ppc64 make doc %else make manual.ps %endif ... %doc manual.ps manual.dvi %ifnarch ppc64 %doc manual.html %endif last build it here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1249703 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490397] Review Request: gmime22 - Library for creating and parsing MIME messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490397 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #23 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 21:50:58 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475322] Review Request: genus2reduction - Computes Reductions of Genus 2 Proper Smooth Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475322 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #11 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 21:49:58 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490996] Review Request: backup-light - A small backup bash utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490996 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 21:51:20 EDT --- cvs done. It's good to talk to upstream and make sure all distros do the same thing and are consistent. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490865] Review Request: perl-Date-Leapyear - Is a particular year a leap year?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490865 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rc040...@freenet.de Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 21:45:48 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490704] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490704 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rjo...@redhat.com Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi 2009-03-19 21:42:01 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491240] Review Request: dropwatch - monitor for dropped network packets in the kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491240 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491240] New: Review Request: dropwatch - monitor for dropped network packets in the kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dropwatch - monitor for dropped network packets in the kernel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491240 Summary: Review Request: dropwatch - monitor for dropped network packets in the kernel Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: nhor...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/d/r/dropwatch/dropwatch.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/d/r/dropwatch/dropwatch-1.0-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: Dropwatch is the user space utility that interfaces to a new kernel netlink protocol for the purposes of monitoring the linux network stack for dropped packets. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479799] Review Request: ghc-uniplate - Uniform type generic traversals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479799 --- Comment #4 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 19:29:04 EDT --- Updated: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/ghc-uniplate.spec http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/ghc-uniplate-1.2.0.3-2.fc10.src.rpm Builds in mock for rawhide but not F-10 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 490562] Review Request: renameutils - A set of programs to make renaming of files easier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490562 Jussi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola 2009-03-19 19:19:17 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > (In reply to comment #4) > > > (In reply to comment #3) > > > > Also, as you are a new packager you should make a habit of running > > > > rpmlint on > > > > all your packages and paste the output in the Review Request every time > > > > you put > > > > in a new release (up to the package being accepted, that is). > > > > > > I'll do that. The only reason I didn't do it is because > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process didn't mention it. > > > However, for my package rpmlint (0.85) doesn't print any errors/warnings: > > > > Yeah, but it's nicer for the reviewer that way :) > > Should this be mentioned on the wiki? Uhh, maybe. The reason why it stands at it does now is probably that the reviewer must in any case run rpmlint on the generated packages. It's just good practice for the packager to check whether s/he has got everything right before submitting the package for critisism. > > - AUTHORS and ChangeLog are missing from documentation. > > ChangeLog mentions that it obsoleted by NEWS and it seems so based on content. > I just added AUTHORS. OK. - Change the summary to "A set of programs to make renaming and copying of files easier". The current summary is inexact since the package is not purely about moving, but also copying files. You can do this upon import to CVS (remember to increment the release, still :) * rpmlint output is clean. The package adheres to Fedora Packaging and Package Review Guidelines and is thus 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 491128] Review Request: photoprint - Utility for printing digital photographs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491128 leigh scott changed: What|Removed |Added CC||leigh123li...@googlemail.co ||m --- Comment #1 from leigh scott 2009-03-19 18:52:33 EDT --- You need to validate the desktop file. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490996] Review Request: backup-light - A small backup bash utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490996
--- Comment #4 from Simon Wesp 2009-03-19
18:35:04 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I personally don't care but it's a reasonable question. I will ping upstream
> about that.
you can install it as %{_bindir}/%{name}
it will work and why you shuld ping 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 490562] Review Request: renameutils - A set of programs to make renaming of files easier
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490562 --- Comment #6 from Michael Ploujnikov 2009-03-19 18:27:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #4) > > (In reply to comment #3) > > > Also, as you are a new packager you should make a habit of running > > > rpmlint on > > > all your packages and paste the output in the Review Request every time > > > you put > > > in a new release (up to the package being accepted, that is). > > > > I'll do that. The only reason I didn't do it is because > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process didn't mention it. > > However, for my package rpmlint (0.85) doesn't print any errors/warnings: > > Yeah, but it's nicer for the reviewer that way :) Should this be mentioned on the wiki? > - You should increment the release number every time you make a new release, > and add a short comment about the changes you've done to the changelog. This > applies also during the review process. > > - Installation does not preserve time stamps. Change > make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT > to: > make install INSTALL="install -p" DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT Fixed. > - AUTHORS and ChangeLog are missing from documentation. ChangeLog mentions that it obsoleted by NEWS and it seems so based on content. I just added AUTHORS. http://plouj.com/rpmbuild/SPECS/renameutils.spec has been updated and http://plouj.com/rpmbuild/SRPMS/renameutils-0.10.0-2.fc9.src.rpm has been uploaded. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479796] Review Request: ghc-haskell-src-exts - Library for Manipulating Haskell source
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479796 Conrad Meyer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #15 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 18:25:59 EDT --- Ok, it built: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1250436 Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479800] Review Request: hlint - Provides Haskell Source Code Suggestions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479800 Bug 479800 depends on bug 479796, which changed state. Bug 479796 Summary: Review Request: ghc-haskell-src-exts - Library for Manipulating Haskell source https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479796 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490996] Review Request: backup-light - A small backup bash utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490996 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter 2009-03-19 18:19:41 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: backup-light Short Description: A small backup bash utility Owners: fab 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 490996] Review Request: backup-light - A small backup bash utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490996
--- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter 2009-03-19
18:18:37 EDT ---
Thanks for the review.
(In reply to comment #1)
> One question:
> Don't you think that %{_bindir}/%{name} instead of %{_bindir}/backuplight
> would
> make more sense?
I personally don't care but it's a reasonable question. I will ping upstream
about that.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479796] Review Request: ghc-haskell-src-exts - Library for Manipulating Haskell source
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479796 --- Comment #14 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 18:12:50 EDT --- Ok, I updated it and started building it in Koji. If it succeeds I'll close this bug. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398 --- Comment #25 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 18:04:26 EDT --- Let's not get off topic on this bug, but I would appreciate it if you wouldn't be so quick to attack in the future. I will try to be less arrogant. (In reply to comment #24) > A failing "make check" ought to raise an alarm bell in a packager's head. A > packager should really look into it and report it upstream, too. In the few sources that I have packaged that provided tests, few of them pass. This is not a problem with the packaging, but rather that upstream doesn't bother keeping their tests passing. Generally upstream will fix them on its own if it wants to, or ignore my reports about it being broken if they don't want to. So I don't feel especially motivated to contact them about it. > 3.p7.fc10 is _much_ better, except that typically upstream > developers ought to participate in the decision on what SONAMEs and versions > to > choose. librankntl.so.20080310 is an interesting approach, but it is different > than upstream's releases and also different than all other distributions, for > example. I am glad to hear it's better. I feel like we should probably include the p7 tag into the SONAME as well. What do you think? My rationale for librankntl.so.20080310 is Hans' post on f-d-l thread about this bug (http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.devel/107950). I don't know if there is a way we can be compatible with all other distributions; as I've said before this library has exactly one user (Sage), and upstream has stopped even releasing independent tarballs (instead, they release .spkgs in Sage). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465858] Package Review: afpfs-ng - Apple Filing Protocol client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465858 --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-03-19 17:55:14 EDT --- Thanks for the review, Stepan. (In reply to comment #5) > FAIL Summary for %package -n fuse-afs is wrong Fixed. > FAIL no duplicates in %files. > #fedora-devel 17:11 < tibbs|h> You can include COPYING exactly once. >Do not duplicate doc files, remove %doc lines from subpackages. I removed it from -devel since it drags in the main package, but did not remove it from the fuse driver. Documentation files are here on purpose, and I don't see why shouldn't they be duplicated (coincidentally, I asked on #fedora-devel too, and got a response COPYING should be in each subpackage). Do you strongly object this? > FAIL Please use %configure --disable-static and drop %exclude *.a Done, thanks for noticing. SPECS: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/afpfs-ng.spec SRPMS: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/afpfs-ng-0.8.1-2.fc11.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 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398 Michael Schwendt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bugs.mich...@gmx.net --- Comment #24 from Michael Schwendt 2009-03-19 17:45:15 EDT --- > being rude or attacking. What do you refer to here? Comment 21? Did you consider your comment 20 as particularly nice and friendly? I found it quite arrogant, but I would have replied to you in private if I had considered it to be a real problem. Your reply about the test-suite is not much different. Nowhere before have you mentioned the failing test. No comment in the spec file at all. As soon as I point out the existance of a test-suite and provide the patch you asked for, you brush aside all this with a single sentence. A failing "make check" ought to raise an alarm bell in a packager's head. A packager should really look into it and report it upstream, too. [...] The "soname mess" is much more than rpmlint's warning about lack of sonames. Release 2.p7.fc10 of the src.rpm added non-versioned sonames, but that didn't fix the mess. 3.p7.fc10 is _much_ better, except that typically upstream developers ought to participate in the decision on what SONAMEs and versions to choose. librankntl.so.20080310 is an interesting approach, but it is different than upstream's releases and also different than all other distributions, for example. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #6 from Simon Wesp 2009-03-19 17:10:13 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: libowfat Short Description: Reimplementation of libdjb Owners: cassmodiah 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 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 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 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398 --- Comment #23 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 16:49:44 EDT --- New URLs: http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SPECS/eclib.spec http://konradm.fedorapeople.org/fedora/SRPMS/eclib-20080310-3.p7.fc10.src.rpm Rpmlint output: eclib.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/librankntl.so.20080310 e...@glibc_2.2.5 eclib-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation eclib-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 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 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 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2009-03-19 16:47:01 EDT --- Thanks. Package builds fine in koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1250306 It is good to go now --- This package (libowfat) is APPROVED by oget --- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480279] Review Request: gnome-globalmenu - centralized menu bar
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480279
--- Comment #19 from Christoph Wickert
2009-03-19 16:37:57 EDT ---
Include the correct license. Ether cat GPLv2 > COPYING during %prep or simply
install the GPLv2 file as is.
(In reply to comment #18)
> It is a GPLv2. The GPLv3 file is not used for licensing. The COPYING file
> contains wrong content.
> What about adding links to the real ChangeLog and NEWS on the web in these
> empty files?
Ok for me, but in a long term proper documentation inside the package would be
better. BTW: README contains a wrong URL:
http:///gnome2-globalmenu.googlecode.com (note the tripple slashes)
> Only on Fedora.
> the xfce4-panel plugin can't build on RHEL5, because the dependency are not
> satisfied.
If it cant be built on RHEL5 I guess it wont build in RHEL4 ether, right?
> There are post installation configuration steps. You have to export
> GTK_MODULES=globalmenu-gnome. Where should this be mentioned?
Ether in the description of xfce4-globalmenu-plugin or in a README.Xfce. I
suggest to add a hint to the description that points to README.xfce:
%description -n xfce4-globalmenu-plugin
The XFCE panel applet of Global Menu is a representation of Global Menu
with GTK widgets. The applet can be inserted to the default top panel
to provide access to the Global Menu of the applications.
(BTW: There no longer is default top panel in Xfce 4.6, just a single panel at
the bottom)
To enable the xfce4-globalmenu-plugin you need to follow the instructions
outlined in %{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}/README.xfce.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486977] Review Request: gnu-free-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=486977 --- Comment #14 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-03-19 16:36:24 EDT --- Sorry, I was not clear. -ENOSLEEP Your spec produces dangling symlinks that won't work, such as /etc/fonts/conf.d/60-gnu-free-sans.conf -> /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/gnu-free-sans -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398 --- Comment #22 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 16:26:45 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) > Created an attachment (id=335928) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=335928) [details] > spec patch for check section > > Great, one of the tests fails even. :) If upstream cannot reproduce it by > running "spkg-check" manually, it would be Fedora-specific. Probably why I didn't include them initially. > That's splitting-hairs. You could apply your weird theory to every package and > move even applications into -devel packages. *This* package builds shared > libraries, which are used at run-time. A -devel package, on the contrary, is > fully optional. A run-time package must not depend on a -devel package. It's not some weird theory I personally have to go out of my way to harm Fedora, I just assume the writers of the guidelines were more knowledgeable about shared libraries and sonames than I am. > > That's a comma. It's there to separate two ideas. > > Doesn't matter, you moved the shared libs actually. That breaks the package > badly already. It's a blocker during review. Shared libs in wrong path, no > ldconfig scriptlets either. I also added sonames, which is what "fixing the soname mess" was referring to. They don't have versions, though. Look at the patch in the last SRPM. > > They can be moved back if you like. > > It will be required for this package to pass review. Done. You know, you can offer constructive criticism without being rude or attacking. I don't mean you or Fedora any harm. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490576] Review Request: bibtex2html - Collection of tools for translating from BibTeX to HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490576 --- Comment #8 from Jussi Lehtola 2009-03-19 16:19:50 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) > The hevea package is not available for ppc64 because of problems with ocaml; i > could copy the ExclusiveArch directive from hevea.spec (i already checked > building of that package fails on ppc64), but i preferred to include > conditionals > %ifnarch to build html manual for archs other than ppc64 only (and provide > just manual.ps for ppc64). The wiki doesnt seem to specify which way would fit > best. OK, sounds reasonable. Did you test the build process to work on ppc64 now? I believe it will fail since hevea is not available and make doc tries to build the html file 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 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398 --- Comment #21 from Michael Schwendt 2009-03-19 16:09:36 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=335928) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=335928) spec patch for check section Great, one of the tests fails even. :) If upstream cannot reproduce it by running "spkg-check" manually, it would be Fedora-specific. > Except you don't require the main package if one doesn't exist. > It's not obvious. That's splitting-hairs. You could apply your weird theory to every package and move even applications into -devel packages. *This* package builds shared libraries, which are used at run-time. A -devel package, on the contrary, is fully optional. A run-time package must not depend on a -devel package. > That's a comma. It's there to separate two ideas. Doesn't matter, you moved the shared libs actually. That breaks the package badly already. It's a blocker during review. Shared libs in wrong path, no ldconfig scriptlets either. > They can be moved back if you like. It will be required for this package to pass review. > it's easy enough to adjust search path at build time for static libs. Why exactly do you move them to a non-standard location? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #4 from Simon Wesp 2009-03-19
16:07:14 EDT ---
>I reviewed this package.
Thank you
>But then the devel package should have
> Provides: %{name}-static = %{version}-%{release}
>and whenever a package BR's this one, it should BR libowfat-static instead of
>libowfat-devel
Done
>* Requires: dietlibc-devel (the top one) is not required.
Done
>So you need to replace the occurences of
>%{_libdir} with %{_prefix}/lib in the SPEC file.
Done
>* We prefer %defattr(-,root,root,-)
Ooops, done
>* Please use %{name}.a instead of libowfat.a in the %files section for macro
>consistency.
Oops, I did it again. Done
>* Fedora specific compilation flags are not honored. Please fix this.
Done
>* Parallel make must be supported whenever possible. If it is not supported,
>this should be noted in the SPEC file as a comment.
Done
>? Is there any program which we can use to see libowfat in action?
I need libowfat for a commercial application.
http://erdgeist.org/arts/software/opentracker/
http://www.mcmilk.de/wiki/Squidwall
are free and opensource application which need libowfat.
(perhaps i will build opentracker)
>! Since we only produce a -devel package, I think its summary should be the
>same as the main summary.
Done
SPEC:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libowfat-0.28/libowfat.spec
SRPM:
http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/libowfat-0.28/libowfat-0.28-2.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 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147 --- Comment #9 from Rex Dieter 2009-03-19 15:49:35 EDT --- Turns out, those translations aren't entirely useful, unless kde-l10n-pt is installed, which owns said symlink. We could alternatively include the common symlink in kde-filesystem too. But, shrug, addressing all that is outside the scope of this review (else, *every* kde app would be guilty). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 451744] Review Request: root - The CERN analyzer for high to medium energy physics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=451744 Mattias Ellert changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se --- Comment #18 from Mattias Ellert 2009-03-19 15:46:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) > There are many dependencies that are not in fedora (like pythia, castor, > globus...) some of which may be free software other aren't. There are several globus packages currently submitted for review. You might want to review some of them to get your dependencies satisfied: bug #453850, bug #453851, bug #453853, bug #453854, bug #453855, bug #453856, bug #453857, bug #453858, bug #453861, bug #453862, bug #453865, bug #467235, bug #467237, bug #467239, bug #478917, bug #478918, bug #478919, bug #478920, bug #478921, bug #478922, bug #478923, bug #478925, bug #478926, bug #478927, bug #478928, bug #478929, bug #478930, bug #478931 The root configure file lists these globus libraries: globuslibs="libglobus_gss_assist_$flavour libglobus_gssapi_gsi_$flavour libglobus_gsi_credential_$flavour libglobus_common_$flavour libglobus_gsi_callback_$flavour libglobus_proxy_ssl_$flavour libglobus_gsi_sysconfig_$flavour libglobus_openssl_error_$flavour libglobus_gssapi_gsi_$flavour libglobus_gsi_callback_$flavour libglobus_oldgaa_$flavour libglobus_gsi_cert_utils_$flavour libglobus_openssl_$flavour libglobus_gsi_proxy_core_$flavour libglobus_callout_$flavour libltdl_$flavour libssl_$flavour libcrypto_$flavour" libglobus_gss_assist > bug #467239 libglobus_gssapi_gsi > bug #467237 libglobus_gsi_credential > bug #453861 libglobus_common > bug #453851 libglobus_gsi_callback, libglobus_globus_oldgaa > bug #453858 libglobus_proxy_ssl > bug #453854 libglobus_gsi_sysconfig > bug #453857 libglobus_openssl_error > bug #453853 libglobus_gsi_cert_utils > bug #453856 libglobus_openssl > bug #453855 libglobus_gsi_proxy_core > bug #453862 libglobus_callout > bug #467235 libltdl > bug #453849 (GPT wrapper for the system version - already approved) libssl, libcrypto > bug #453850 (GPT wrapper for the system version) The configure script also looks for the grid-proxy-init binary - this is available in > bug #453865 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491201] New: Review Request: ninvaders - Space Invaders clone written in ncurses for cli gaming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ninvaders - Space Invaders clone written in ncurses for cli gaming https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491201 Summary: Review Request: ninvaders - Space Invaders clone written in ncurses for cli gaming Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: maxamill...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/ninvaders.spec SRPM URL: http://maxamillion.fedorapeople.org/ninvaders-0.1.1-1.src.rpm Description: Ever wanted to place space invaders when you can't find a GUI? Now you can! ninvaders is a ncurses based space invaders clone to play from the command line -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428568] Review Request: synfig - Synfig is a vector based 2D animation 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=428568 --- Comment #37 from Kamil Pawlowski 2009-03-19 15:14:22 EDT --- Yes, this is x86_64 specific problem, now I use i386 compiled packages on my x86_64 machine and is ok. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486977] Review Request: gnu-free-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=486977 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(l...@jcomserv.net | |) | --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla 2009-03-19 15:08:04 EDT --- I fixed the Requires. I see nothing in /u/s/fc/conf.avail, do you mean /etc/fonts/conf.avail? If so, my files resemble those, but are not so complex. They're a straight filling in of a template. If they need enhancement or alteration, I'm not sure where to go next with them, as I have only a vague idea what these files do, and not much idea *how*. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147 --- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19 14:58:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > $ rpm -q -f /usr/share/doc/HTML/pt > kde-filesystem-4-23.fc10.noarch Please be careful: # LANG=C rpm -qf /usr/share/doc/HTML/pt/common error: file /usr/share/doc/HTML/pt/common: No such file or directory -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147 nucleo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alekc...@googlemail.com --- Comment #7 from nucleo 2009-03-19 14:47:57 EDT --- There is in skanlite.desktop Icon=skanlite but skanlite.png is absent and probably should be added. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491084] Review Request: medusa - parallel brute forcing pasword cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491084 --- Comment #7 from Jan F. Chadima 2009-03-19 14:48:07 EDT --- The proper path is: /medved-7/wydobitki/?path=fedora The package is testet to compile on enwironmet without afp packages. Spec URL: http://www.benhur.prf.cuni.cz/medved-7/wydobitki/fedora/medusa.spec SRPM URL: http://www.benhur.prf.cuni.cz/medved-7/wydobitki/fedora/medusa-1.5-2.fc11.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 483364] Review Request: EekBoek - Bookkeeping software for small and medium-size businesses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483364 --- Comment #6 from Johan Vromans 2009-03-19 14:43:26 EDT --- Thanks for the feedback. Unless someone comes up with a more elegant solution I'll consider this approach for the next release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147 --- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter 2009-03-19 14:44:32 EDT --- $ rpm -q -f /usr/share/doc/HTML/pt kde-filesystem-4-23.fc10.noarch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483364] Review Request: EekBoek - Bookkeeping software for small and medium-size businesses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483364
--- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19
14:36:17 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Thanks for your kind and constructive feedback. Most items are trivially
> fixed,
> which I will do in a next release.
>
> The requires/provides "%{name}-db" seems to be confusing, which may be an
> indication that the intention is not clear. Or wrong.
>
> As you may have guessed, EekBoek supports both SQLite and PostgreSQL as
> database backend (and probably more to come). It is tempting to bundle the
> SQLite backend with the main package (that is what Debian does) but I
> personally do not like having to install a package that one doesn't need.
>
> What would be a better approach for this?
I would say that bundling SQLite backend to main package is
undesired solution.
In such case I recommend
- not to use virtual "Provodes/Requires: %{name}-db"
- write some text named "README.Fedora", for example to inform
that
- BekBook needs one of the database backends
- Currently Fedora supports SQLite and PostgreSQL
- The admin has to choose either of them and install
the choosed one by "yum install BekBook-db-"
by him/herself
and add to the "%description" of BekBook package some sentence
like "Please read README.Fedora"
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428568] Review Request: synfig - Synfig is a vector based 2D animation 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=428568 --- Comment #36 from Muayyad Alsadi 2009-03-19 14:34:44 EDT --- > 1.) Please, no more backtraces of crashes. (Thanks for them though.) I am > aware of the problem. > Unfortunately, I can't reproduce it and suspect it's x86_64 specific. mine are on i386 check my tracebacks then because I got them in i386 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486977] Review Request: gnu-free-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=486977 Nicolas Mailhot changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(l...@jcomserv.net ||) --- Comment #12 from Nicolas Mailhot 2009-03-19 14:31:17 EDT --- Ok, you're producing the right package names at last But you compat package is still requiring package names that do not match what you build And if you look in /usr/share/fontconfig/conf.avail/ you'll see the files you pack do not match what other packages do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147
--- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19
14:24:50 EDT ---
By the way:
- Currently on my system there are no such directories named
/usr/share/doc/HTML/{pt,sv,uk}/common and no package seem
to provide such directories.
I think either
- all symlinks pointing to these directories should be removed
- or all symlinks pointing to these directories should be
changed to point to /usr/share/doc/HTML/en/common .
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483364] Review Request: EekBoek - Bookkeeping software for small and medium-size businesses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483364
--- Comment #4 from Johan Vromans 2009-03-19 14:21:48
EDT ---
Thanks for your kind and constructive feedback. Most items are trivially fixed,
which I will do in a next release.
The requires/provides "%{name}-db" seems to be confusing, which may be an
indication that the intention is not clear. Or wrong.
As you may have guessed, EekBoek supports both SQLite and PostgreSQL as
database backend (and probably more to come). It is tempting to bundle the
SQLite backend with the main package (that is what Debian does) but I
personally do not like having to install a package that one doesn't need.
What would be a better approach for this?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468753] Review Request: nss-myhostname - glibc plugin for local system host name resolution
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468753 --- Comment #2 from Lennart Poettering 2009-03-19 14:26:33 EDT --- Spec file updated at same place. Happy? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479147] Review Request: skanlite - A scanning program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=479147 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19 14:12:08 EDT --- Some notes: * License - Strictly speaking, the license tag of this package should be "GPLv2 and GPLv3". * Source tarball - There is another "0.2" released tarball under ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/4.2.0/src/extragear/ and this is actually different from the one under 4.1.3. Would you update the tarball? Also: NOTE: Before being sponsored: This package will be accepted with another few work. But before I accept this package, someone (I am a candidate) must sponsor you. Once you are sponsored, you have the right to review other submitters' review requests and approve the packages formally. For this reason, the person who want to be sponsored (like you) are required to "show that you have an understanding of the process and of the packaging guidelines" as is described on : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/HowToGetSponsored Usually there are two ways to show this. A. submit other review requests with enough quality. B. Do a "pre-review" of other person's review request (at the time you are not sponsored, you cannot do a formal review) When you have submitted a new review request or have pre-reviewed other person's review request, please write the bug number on this bug report so that I can check your comments or review request. Fedora package collection review requests which are waiting for someone to review can be checked on my wiki page: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Mtasaka#B._Review_request_tickets (Check "No one is reviewing") Review guidelines are described mainly on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465858] Package Review: afpfs-ng - Apple Filing Protocol client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465858
Stepan Kasal changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||ska...@redhat.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ska...@redhat.com
--- Comment #5 from Stepan Kasal 2009-03-19 13:48:47 EDT
---
OK source files match upstream:
688560de1cde57ab8d9e0ef7dc6436dbf0267fe8884f9014e50ff92b297b01a8
afpfs-ng-0.8.1.tar.bz2
OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
FAIL Summary for %package -n fuse-afs is wrong
OK dist tag is present.
OK build root is correct, though I'd prefer:
BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
OK license field matches the actual license.
OK license is open source-compatible.
OK license text included in package.
FAIL no duplicates in %files.
#fedora-devel 17:11 < tibbs|h> You can include COPYING exactly once.
Do not duplicate doc files, remove %doc lines from subpackages.
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK BuildRequires are proper.
OK compiler flags are appropriate.
OK %clean is present.
OK package builds in mock.
OK package installs properly.
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
OK rpmlint is silent.
OK final provides and requires are sane, attached at the end of the review
OK no %check because the package contains no testsuite
OK shared libraries present, ldconfig is run
OK owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
OK scriptlets look fine
OK code, not content.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
OK headers in -devel.
OK no pkgconfig files.
OK no libtool .la droppings.
FAIL Please use %configure --disable-static and drop %exclude *.a
OK desktop files valid and installed properly.
Fix the three details marked FAIL, and put an updated spec to the martyr.
afpfs-ng-0.8.1-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm:
--provides:
libafpclient.so.0()(64bit)
afpfs-ng = 0.8.1-1.fc11
afpfs-ng(x86-64) = 0.8.1-1.fc11
--requires:
/sbin/ldconfig
/sbin/ldconfig
libafpclient.so.0()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
libfuse.so.2()(64bit)
libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit)
libgcrypt.so.11(GCRYPT_1.2)(64bit)
libgmp.so.3()(64bit)
libncurses.so.5()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2)(64bit)
libreadline.so.5()(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
afpfs-ng-devel-0.8.1-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm:
--provides:
afpfs-ng-devel = 0.8.1-1.fc11
afpfs-ng-devel(x86-64) = 0.8.1-1.fc11
--requires:
afpfs-ng = 0.8.1
libafpclient.so.0()(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
fuse-afp-0.8.1-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm:
--provides:
fuse-afp = 0.8.1-1.fc11
fuse-afp(x86-64) = 0.8.1-1.fc11
--requires:
/bin/bash
libafpclient.so.0()(64bit)
libc.so.6()(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)(64bit)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
libfuse.so.2()(64bit)
libfuse.so.2(FUSE_2.2)(64bit)
libfuse.so.2(FUSE_2.6)(64bit)
libgcrypt.so.11()(64bit)
libgmp.so.3()(64bit)
libncurses.so.5()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.3.2)(64bit)
libreadline.so.5()(64bit)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rtld(GNU_HASH)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476398] Review Request: eclib - A Library for Doing Computations on Elliptic Curves
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476398
--- Comment #20 from Conrad Meyer 2009-03-19 13:40:26 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #19)
> Find out where the -I/usr/local/include and -L/usr/local/lib come from, then
> get rid of them for sake of reproducible builds. No issue for builds in clean
> buildroots. Not clean for ordinary builds on installed Fedora systems where
> /usr/local might contain locally built stuff.
This doesn't matter on Koji or in mock.
> > %packagedevel
>
> According to the guidelines, this ought to
> Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
> to enforce a matching pair of development files and binaries.
> This guideline alone should make a packager realise "oh, wait, there are
> shared
> libs in this package, so not creating a main library package for them would be
> strange".
Except you don't require the main package if one doesn't exist. It's not
obvious.
> In reply to comment 3:
> > - fix the soname mess, probably install to a subdirectory of _libdir?
>
> > %{_libdir}/%{name}/*.so
> > %{_libdir}/%{name}/lib*.a
>
> That doesn't fix the "soname mess".
That's a comma. It's there to separate two ideas.
> It makes things worse, because you've moved the shared libs out of run-timer
> linker's search path. Any application linked to these libs would fail to
> start.
Right, and the exactly one application that cares isn't in Fedora yet and ships
its own copy of eclib.
> The static archive would not be found either at build-time. It would be
> necessary to adjust the compiler's library search path (-L%{_libdir}/%{name}),
> which probably no existing application does, because it expects to find the
> eclib libraries in default search path.
Doesn't matter, it's easy enough to adjust search path at build time for static
libs.
> Further, the shared libraries [if moved incorrectly as in current spec file]
> are still seen by rpmbuild's dependency generators. They still lead to
> automatic SONAME "Provides" and "Requires", even if the libraries won't be
> found at run-time.
They can be moved back if you like.
> Noticing that the package builds several test programs, consider including a
> %check section for "make check". It is good packaging-practise to run a
> test-suite at build-time unless it is known/confirmed to be broken.
I'm happy to take a patch.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483364] Review Request: EekBoek - Bookkeeping software for small and medium-size businesses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483364 Johan Vromans changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(jvrom...@squirrel | |.nl)| --- Comment #3 from Johan Vromans 2009-03-19 13:15:52 EDT --- Stay tuned, I'll get back ASAP. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490576] Review Request: bibtex2html - Collection of tools for translating from BibTeX to HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490576 --- Comment #7 from Guido Grazioli 2009-03-19 12:53:35 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > The patching with perl/sed is OK too, maybe even a bit tidier. ok then > - The package includes documentation that can be built - please add > BuildRequires: hevea > BuildRequires: tex(latex) > > and > > make doc > > to the spec file. Include manual.ps and manual.html (and maybe also > manual.dvi) > to documentation. The hevea package is not available for ppc64 because of problems with ocaml; i could copy the ExclusiveArch directive from hevea.spec (i already checked building of that package fails on ppc64), but i preferred to include conditionals %ifnarch to build html manual for archs other than ppc64 only (and provide just manual.ps for ppc64). The wiki doesnt seem to specify which way would fit best. Files here: http://guidograzioli.fedorapeople.org/packages/bibtex2html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483364] Review Request: EekBoek - Bookkeeping software for small and medium-size businesses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483364 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(jvrom...@squirrel ||.nl) --- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19 12:46:56 EDT --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 479832] Review Request: mmpong - a massively multiplayer pong 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=479832 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19 12:44:42 EDT --- Again ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468189] Review Request: rear - Relax and Recovery (disaster recovery framework)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=468189 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #33 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-03-19 12:39:14 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) > - we have tested rear on 64-bit platforms (AMD, IA64) and the lib64 stuff you > find under the skel directory are necessary (empty) directories where rear (in > rescue mode) will copy files into (in the build area created for that > purpose). > All other necessary items (files, libraries) will be copied automatically by > the rear mkrescue process. We have tested on fedora10 too. - What I meant by the previous comment is that it looks strange that there is /usr/share/rear/skel/default/lib64 directory but /usr/share/rear/skel/default/usr/lib64 does not exist in this package, for example. Assigning to myself. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486620] Review Request: python-createrepo - Python module to create common metadata repositorys
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486620 Dennis Gilmore changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from Dennis Gilmore 2009-03-19 12:25:36 EDT --- closing its in epel testing now -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459751] Review Request: osgGtk - Gtk and Gtkmm widgets for OpenSceneGraph
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459751 --- Comment #7 from Rick L Vinyard Jr 2009-03-19 12:23:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > > Let me know what you think on these items, and then I'll push out a new > > upstream release and post a new spec/srpm. > > Can we have a fresh Spec/SRPM pair? I pushed out a new upstream release that fixes things like the license in the Makefiles, the pkgconfig .pc files, etc. This spec has all the above mentioned items fixed. I'd really like to keep the name at osgGtk to not only match the osg library names, but to also make it easier when I figure out how to get autoconf to name the dist packages osgGtk-0.1.4.tar.bz2. I've tried to keep the case notation consistent since programmers #include or #include http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/osgGtk.spec http://miskatonic.cs.nmsu.edu/pub/osgGtk-0.1.4-1.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 490996] Review Request: backup-light - A small backup bash utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490996
Simon Wesp changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cassmod...@fedoraproject.or
||g
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Simon Wesp 2009-03-19
12:14:14 EDT ---
R E V I E W
===
* MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
OK - rpmlint is silent
* MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK
* MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK
* MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
OK
* MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines
OK - GPLv2+
* MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK - GPLv2+
* MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.
OK - it's the file COPYING
* MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK
* MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK
* MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
Downloaded 5 times md5sum dca0069d016d9da11809f806dde55254
Source in SRPM md5sum dca0069d016d9da11809f806dde55254
OK - md5sums are the same
* MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK - noarch for all packages
* MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
tested on F10 ppc - works for me
* MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK - no BuildRequires, just a script install
* MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
N/A
* MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
N/A
* MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this,
use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker.
N/A
* MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
N/A
* MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. [13]
N/A
* MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
OK
* MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
* MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK
* MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK
* MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The definition
of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not restricted to
size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
N/A
* MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
OK
* MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A
* MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A
* MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'
(for directory ownership and usability).
N/A
* MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
N/A
* MUST: In the vast major
[Bug 490988] Review Request: libvdpau - Wrapper library for the Video Decode and Presentation API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490988 --- Comment #3 from Bill Nottingham 2009-03-19 12:01:54 EDT --- That is (AFAIK) only supported by a different binary-only driver (Poulsbo). Basically, it's all a big mess. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491084] Review Request: medusa - parallel brute forcing pasword cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491084 --- Comment #6 from Miroslav Suchy 2009-03-19 11:28:23 EDT --- Not Found The requested URL /medved-7/wydobitki/path=fedora was not found on this server. It is good habit to bump up release with new revision of package. Builds still fails: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1249939 DEBUG util.py:256: No Package Found for afpfs-ng-devel -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465858] Package Review: afpfs-ng - Apple Filing Protocol client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465858 --- Comment #4 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-03-19 11:12:31 EDT --- Thanks, Jan. Good to know this will be of some use -- I can eventually spend some time getting the sick think into shape. Do you think you can review 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 491128] Review Request: photoprint - Utility for printing digital photographs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491128 manuel wolfshant 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 491128] New: Review Request: photoprint - Utility for printing digital photographs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: photoprint - Utility for printing digital photographs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491128 Summary: Review Request: photoprint - Utility for printing digital photographs Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: zarko.pin...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://wiki.open.hr/zpintar/fedora10/SPECS/photoprint.spec SRPM URL: http://wiki.open.hr/zpintar/fedora10/SRPMS/photoprint-0.4.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: PhotoPrint is a utility designed to assist in the process of printing digital photographs. PhotoPrint can do the following: * Print photographs 1-up, 2-up, 4-up or with any user-selectable number of rows and columns. * Create posters, split over several pages. * Arrange images into a sort of Carousel, fading from one to another. (Ideal for CD labels) * Crop images to fit a specific frame. * Apply a decorative border to an image. * Make use of ICC colour profiles to provide accurate output. * Send 16-bit data to the printer, to avoid "contouring" problems in smooth gradients. * Apply a handful of effecs to an image, including sharpening, removing colour and adjusting colour temperature (ideal for cooling or warming black-and-white prints). I checked packet with Mock (32-bit & 64-bit). Rpmlint checks are clean. This is my first package and I need sponsor. kind regards, Zarko -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 454888] Review Request: libgdither - Library for applying dithering to PCM audio sources
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454888 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla 2009-03-19 10:47:44 EDT --- Looks good still, is there documentation that could go in -devel? And are the issues you raised in #2 resolved? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491084] Review Request: medusa - parallel brute forcing pasword cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491084 --- Comment #5 from Jan F. Chadima 2009-03-19 10:26:27 EDT --- repaired packages are on page:http://www.benhur.prf.cuni.cz/medved-7/wydobitki/path=fedora Spec URL: http://www.benhur.prf.cuni.cz/medved-7/wydobitki/fedora/medusa.spec SRPM URL: http://www.benhur.prf.cuni.cz/medved-7/wydobitki/fedora/medusa-1.5-1.fc11.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 491097] Review Request: hyphen-fa - Farsi 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=491097 Caolan McNamara changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Caolan McNamara 2009-03-19 10:03:19 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: hyphen-fa Short Description: Farsi hyphenation rules Owners: caolanm Branches: devel 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 491090] Review Request: kernel-firmware - firmware files for use with Linux kernel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491090 Itamar Reis Peixoto changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ita...@ispbrasil.com.br --- Comment #2 from Itamar Reis Peixoto 2009-03-19 10:03:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > We'll want to drop the kernel-firmware subpackage from the kernel while we're > at it, and tweak the Requires: seems to be a good idea for me, because kernel-firmware doesn't change every time and this will save some bandwidth. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491097] Review Request: hyphen-fa - Farsi 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=491097 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-03-19 09:58:30 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide). koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1249856 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + verified upstream source. 833571ff4b9b3e20dd2c7e2e97860205 fahyph.zip + 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. + 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. 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 490397] Review Request: gmime22 - Library for creating and parsing MIME messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490397 Bernard Johnson changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Bernard Johnson 2009-03-19 09:56:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) > Note: I don't have a rawhide install to test, but I assume that you've tested > parallel-installing gmime22 and gmime22-devel alongside the current 2.4.x > gmime > and gmime-devel? (Looking at the spec file it looks like it should be OK). I haven't because I don't have a rawhide system either. However, I've renamed some files in the spec file and inspected the rpm files list and everything looks ok. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: gmime22 Short Description: Library for creating and parsing MIME messages Owners: bjohnson Branches: devel 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 491097] Review Request: hyphen-fa - Farsi 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=491097 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491084] Review Request: medusa - parallel brute forcing pasword cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491084
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt 2009-03-19
09:48:01 EDT ---
Three things that can be found by skimming over the spec file:
* http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Parallel_make
*
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Why_the_.25makeinstall_macro_should_not_be_used
* Directory %{_libdir}/medusa is not included:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UnownedDirectories
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483250] Review Request: chordii - Print songbooks (lyrics + chords)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483250 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fab...@bernewireless.net 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 454888] Review Request: libgdither - Library for applying dithering to PCM audio sources
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=454888 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla 2009-03-19 09:43:38 EDT --- Nicolas, I'll finish this review shortly, and move from there. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475000] Review Request: cmconvert - CacheMate import file converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475000 --- Comment #19 from Fabian Affolter 2009-03-19 09:40:09 EDT --- Thorsten, thanks for the links. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475000] Review Request: cmconvert - CacheMate import file converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475000 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #18 from Fabian Affolter 2009-03-19 09:37:24 EDT --- bodhi - 2009-02-16 15:13:22 This update has been pushed to stable -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491084] Review Request: medusa - parallel brute forcing pasword cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491084
--- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchy 2009-03-19 09:32:26 EDT
---
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[!] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
[!] Rpmlint output: empty
I really did not went further in review.
Please read
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
before submission and make sure the package meet the requirements. Please post
here updated spec and srpm, when you fix the errors.
Failed items:
Please change Summary from:
medusa is parallel brute forcing pasword cracker
to:
Parallel brute forcing password cracker
(also note missing "s" in password)
medusa did not built:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1249822
due missing build requires:
No Package Found for afpfs-ng-devel
$ rpmlint medusa-1.5-1.fc11.src.rpm
medusa.src: E: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
medusa.src: E: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
medusa.src: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 19, tab: line 11)
medusa.src: W: summary-not-capitalized medusa is parallel brute forcing pasword
cracker
medusa.src: E: description-line-too-long Medusa is a speedy, massively
parallel, modular, login brute-forcer for network services. Some of the key
features of Medusa are:
medusa.src: E: description-line-too-long * Thread-based parallel testing.
Brute-force testing can be performed against multiple hosts, users or passwords
concurrently.
medusa.src: E: description-line-too-long * Flexible user input. Target
information (host/user/password) can be specified in a variety of ways. For
example, each item can be either a single entry or a file containing multiple
entries. Additionally, a combination file format allows the user to refine
their target listing.
medusa.src: E: description-line-too-long * Modular design. Each service
module exists as an independent .mod file. This means that no modifications are
necessary to the core application in order to extend the supported list of
services for brute-forcing.
medusa.src: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
medusa.src: W: invalid-license GPL
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 4 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
