[Bug 494726] Review Request: Gnote - Note Taking Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494726 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System 2009-04-16 03:12:41 EDT --- gnote-0.1.2-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/gnote-0.1.2-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225660] Merge Review: crash
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225660 manuel wolfshant changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro|nob...@fedoraproject.org -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483641] Review Request: perl-Date-Tiny - Date object with as little code as possible
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483641 manuel wolfshant changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #4 from manuel wolfshant 2009-04-16 03:38:55 EDT --- the package is in updates for some time, 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 477750] Review Request: Ogmtools - Tools for Ogg media streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477750 Gianluca Sforna changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #15 from Gianluca Sforna 2009-04-16 03:55:16 EDT --- Package imported and built. Thank you very much -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483543] Review Request: systemtapguiserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #20 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-04-16 04:03:56 EDT --- * Wed Apr 15 2009 Anithra P Janakiraman 1.0-7 - Changes to spec file. Anithra, this is the extreme example of poorly written changelog entry. When writing change log entries, describe what you changed, such as: - Don't strip binary anymore - Correct the file modes ... Anyways, not anything that would block the review. - compiler flags used correctly - spec file clean, legible, using American english - filelist sane - builds fine in mock - requires fine - provides fine - builds in mock - rpmlint happy The package is APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495669] Review Request: sgpio - Intel SGPIO enclosure management 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=495669 Dan Horák changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Dan Horák 2009-04-16 04:12:23 EDT --- The packager and I agreed to change the version to more standard 1.2.0.10, but what remains is the mess upstream is doing with their releases. We expect it will improve in the future. There are no blockers now and this package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493246] Review Request: Shutter -- a feature-rich screenshot 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=493246 Liang Suilong changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(liangsuil...@gmai | |l.com) | --- Comment #2 from Liang Suilong 2009-04-16 04:14:36 EDT --- Here is a new package. I have added the missed buildrequires. SRPM: http://liangsuilong.fedorapeople.org/shutter/shutter-0.70.2-2.ppa3.fc10.src.rpm SPEC: http://liangsuilong.fedorapeople.org/shutter/shutter.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495563] Review Request: febootstrap - Bootstrap a new Fedora system (like debootstrap)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495563 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2009-04-16 04:49:52 EDT --- febootstrap-1.5-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/febootstrap-1.5-3.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494872] Review Request: perl-Data-ObjectDriver - Simple, transparent data interface, with caching
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494872 --- Comment #15 from Emmanuel Seyman 2009-04-16 04:51:58 EDT --- (In reply to comment #14) > > 1) autoreq is still disabled :) /me is an idiot. > This same test passes cleanly on my local machine (x86_64). Hm. Now that I've add perl(DBD::SQLite) to the BRs, I'm getting it on mock/fedora-rawhide-i386 but I can't reproduce on my local machine (fedora-10-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 489418] Review Request: nssbackup - (Not so) Simple Backup Suite for desktop use
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489418 Simon Wesp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Simon Wesp 2009-04-16 04:46:21 EDT --- thanks for your review Robert New Package CVS Request === Package Name: nssbackup Short Description: (Not so) Simple Backup Suite for desktop use Owners: cassmodiah Branches: F-11 F-10 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495563] Review Request: febootstrap - Bootstrap a new Fedora system (like debootstrap)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495563 --- Comment #9 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-04-16 04:49:28 EDT --- Done for Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1301835 Done for F-11: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1301844 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495563] Review Request: febootstrap - Bootstrap a new Fedora system (like debootstrap)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495563 --- Comment #11 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-04-16 05:09:30 EDT --- Fails to build on F-10 at the moment: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1301871 Requires fakechroot 2.9 which is still in F-10 updates-testing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494283] Review Request: mingw32-libp11 - MingGW Windows libp11 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=494283 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2009-04-16 05:47:07 EDT --- mingw32-libp11-0.2.4-1.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libp11-0.2.4-1.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494283] Review Request: mingw32-libp11 - MingGW Windows libp11 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=494283 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2009-04-16 05:45:29 EDT --- mingw32-libp11-0.2.4-1.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mingw32-libp11-0.2.4-1.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495412] Review Request: flamerobin - Graphical client for Firebird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495412 Zarko changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zarko.pin...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Zarko 2009-04-16 05:48:38 EDT --- Hello, I am not a sponsor, so I can not take a sponsorship of you, but I can make an unofficial review. At first, when writing a package from scratch, you should base your spec file on the Fedora spec file template, see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Rpmdevtools command: rpmdev-newspec For naming, licensing and other conventions, see&study Package Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines For using macros inside od spec, see: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros Build fails with this error: usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lfbclient please, fix this... 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 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 #8 from Johan Vromans 2009-04-16 06:15:08 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > I would say that bundling SQLite backend to main package is > undesired solution. However, in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483286#c6, Hans de Goede writes: > I know this is optional but in Fedora we always try to enable as much > features in packaes as possible, even if this drags in a few additional > dependencies. Following this practice, it would be preferred to include the SQLite driver in the main package, especially since SQLite is relatively small and already a core part of many packages. This would result in a working installation for people that do not read READMEs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495411] Review Request: dnsjava - Java DNS implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495411 --- Comment #10 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2009-04-16 06:24:57 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) > It might work, but I don't know if Ville will allow you to decode his family. I speak what you may decode it from ANY encoding in any language (Greek, Russian, French, Polish) and I do not understood you guessing what it should be based on iso8859-X family!!! > The package is good to go. Beware that, on the last SRPM above, the default is > set to *do* the tests. You will need to change that behavior before you > commit, > otherwise koji will fail. Off course. It is done. > > -- > This package (dnsjava) is APPROVED by oget > -- Orcan Ogetbil, tenk you very much for the review. > Since you are now more experienced in packaging java stuff, would you like to > check out my java review requests? They are all quite similar to this one in > terms of packaging. Ok, I try do review. But, but... do not wait it shortly. I do not make review until now! I start reading guidelines for that now. And, ok, first review will be yours! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #9 from Hans de Goede 2009-04-16 06:34:05 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #5) > > I would say that bundling SQLite backend to main package is > > undesired solution. > > However, in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483286#c6, Hans de > Goede writes: > > > I know this is optional but in Fedora we always try to enable as much > > features in packaes as possible, even if this drags in a few additional > > dependencies. > > Following this practice, it would be preferred to include the SQLite driver in > the main package, especially since SQLite is relatively small and already a > core part of many packages. > > This would result in a working installation for people that do not read > READMEs. +1 Regards, Hans -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495411] Review Request: dnsjava - Java DNS implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495411 --- Comment #11 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2009-04-16 06:37:45 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: dnsjava Short Description: Java DNS implementation Owners: hubbitus Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492133] Review Request: mingw32-libglade2 - MinGW Windows Libglade2 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=492133 --- Comment #2 from Thomas Sailer 2009-04-16 05:16:49 EDT --- Thanks. Update according to your comments: Spec URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libglade2.spec SRPM URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libglade2-2.6.4-1.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 488174] Review Request: nimbus-theme-gnome - The Nimbus theme originally from Sun
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488174
Christoph Wickert changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fed...@christoph-wickert.de
--- Comment #5 from Christoph Wickert 2009-04-16
05:52:49 EDT ---
I think you should split this into subpackes, so it can be used by other
desktop environments as well without installing the Gnome bits.
- gtk-nimbus-engine (arch, includes libnimbus.so and gtkrc, requires
gtk-engines for dir ownership)
- nimbus-icon-theme (noarch, contains all the icons, requires hicolor-icon
theme for dir ownership)
- nimbus-metacity-theme (noarch, includes %{_datadir}/themes/nimbus/metacity-1,
requires metacity)
- nimbus-theme-gnome (noarch, requires all the others and only includes
index.theme)
More issues/suggestions:
- Group should be User Interface/X or UserInterface/Desktops
- %configure --disable-static and drop the devel package
- %{nimbus_dir}/index.theme is listed twice in %files section. Once as
%{nimbus_dir}/index.theme and once as content of in %{_datadir}/themes/nimbus/
- don't use a define for %{nimbus_dir} because it makes %files more complicated
(as the duplicate index.theme proves), it's only used twice in the spec and
will most likely never change.
- preserve timestamp during iconv, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/PackagingTricks#Convert_encoding_to_UTF-8
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490725] Review Request: geanyvc - Version Controler plugin for geany
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490725 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2009-04-16 05:07:52 EDT --- geanyvc-0.5-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/geanyvc-0.5-4.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483286] Review Request: perl-Data-Report - A flexible plugin-driven reporting 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=483286 Hans de Goede changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Hans de Goede 2009-04-16 05:33:57 EDT --- Looks good, approved! Once eekboek also is in good shape I'll sponsor you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483543] Review Request: systemtapguiserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543 --- Comment #21 from Anithra 2009-04-16 04:58:52 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) > Anithra, this is the extreme example of poorly written changelog entry. When > writing change log entries, describe what you changed, such as: > > - Don't strip binary anymore > - Correct the file modes Point taken!. will do. > > The package is > > APPROVED Thanks Lubomir! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492613] Review Request: canto - Atom/RSS feed reader based on ncurses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492613 Christoph Wickert changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Christoph Wickert 2009-04-16 07:11:20 EDT --- The new package fa2b37ac68d154112a7be7754af846bd canto-0.6.9-1.fc10.src.rpm Fixes all outstanding issues: OK - rpmlint: $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/canto-* 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. OK - License tag matches actual license (GPLv2) OK - BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel OK - Requires: python-chardet APPROVED. Removing NEEDSPONSOR, because I'm going to sponsor you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492613] Review Request: canto - Atom/RSS feed reader based on ncurses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492613 --- Comment #6 from Andreas Osowski 2009-04-16 07:13:37 EDT --- Thanks alot! I'm going to remove the flag from all my other tickets, too then. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492583] Review Request: purple-gfire - Xfire plugin for libpurple
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492583 Andreas Osowski 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 495942] Review Request: guimup - A GTKmm based drag-&-drop oriented client for MPD
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495942 Andreas Osowski 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 492479] Review Request: razertool - Tool for controlling Razer Copperhead mice
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492479 Andreas Osowski changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | --- Comment #10 from Andreas Osowski 2009-04-16 07:15:24 EDT --- Christoph Wickert is sponsoring me, FE-NEEDSPONSOR removed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493750] Review Request: netcf - a library for managing network configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493750 Michael Schwendt changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt 2009-04-16 07:18:45 EDT --- Okay, packaging-wise the 0.0.2-1.fc10 src.rpm is fine: APPROVED [...] The remaining minor issues are within your upstream tarball: * Duplicated CFLAGS. Quoting from: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1300747&name=build.log >>> make[3]: Entering directory `/builddir/build/BUILD/netcf-0.0.2/src' /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.. --std=gnu99 -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -I ../gnulib/lib -Wall -Wformat -Wformat-security -Wmissing-prototypes -Wnested-externs -Wpointer-arith -Wextra -Wshadow -Wcast-align -Wwrite-strings -Waggregate-return -Wstrict-prototypes -Winline -Wredundant-decls -Wno-sign-compare -I/usr/include/libxml2 -I/usr/include/libxml2 -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i586 -mtune=generic -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -MT netcf.lo -MD -MP -MF .deps/netcf.Tpo -c -o netcf.lo netcf.c <<< Actually, it's _not_ duplicated CFLAGS as it seemed first, but that you AC_SUBST default NETCF_CFLAGS in the configure script (precisely: -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fasynchronous-unwind-tables), which are added a second time with Fedora's global optflags. I've expected Fedora's CFLAGS to override the defaults except for a hardcoded -fexceptions (which you want for interoperability with netcf API users written in C++). * pkgconfig file issues. The result of adding the "Requires" to the .pc file is this: $ pkg-config --cflags netcf -I/usr/include/libxml2 $ pkg-config --libs netcf -lnetcf -laugeas -lxslt -lz -lm -lxml2 This is not needed for shared linking (the default with Fedora), because you don't need all those libs and headers when building with the libnetcf API. You only need them when linking statically (comment 2), and then you would prefer "Requires.private" and "Libs.private" and "pkg-config --static ...". The current pkgconfig inter-package dependencies lead to dependency-bloat. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483543] Review Request: systemtapguiserver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483543 Anithra changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #22 from Anithra 2009-04-16 05:03:51 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: systemtapguiserver Short Description: Server for the eclipse-systemtapgui client Owners: anithra Branches: F-10 F-11 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 495669] Review Request: sgpio - Intel SGPIO enclosure management 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=495669 Jiri Moskovcak changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jiri Moskovcak 2009-04-16 05:18:14 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sgpio Short Description: Intel SGPIO enclosure management utility Owners: jmoskovc Branches: F11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 486009] Review Request: php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish - Quick two-way blowfish encryption
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=486009 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Xavier Bachelot 2009-04-16 05:21:48 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: php-pear-Crypt-Blowfish New Branches: EL-5 Owners: xavierb -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495411] Review Request: dnsjava - Java DNS implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495411 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 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 493750] Review Request: netcf - a library for managing network configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493750 --- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt 2009-04-16 07:36:30 EDT --- And similar to my earlier comment 2, on Fedora <= 10, where there are no automatic pkgconfig RPM dependencies added by rpmbuild, the netcf.pc file's current dependencies lead to missing RPM Requires in netcf-devel (for the needed -devel pkgs). So, really better switch to "Requires.private" and "Libs.private". -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493531] Review Request: perl-Test-Most - Test::Most Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493531 --- Comment #8 from Marcela Maslanova 2009-04-16 07:53:00 EDT --- Succes! http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1302103 The problem was with tag. Because perl-Data-Dumper-Names are tagged into dist-f11-updates-candidate or dist-f12 and my scratch builds were into dist-f11, which doesn't know about perl-Data-Dumper-Names. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495950] Review Request: safecopy - Safe copying of files and partitions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495950 Jussi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi 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 495950] Review Request: safecopy - Safe copying of files and partitions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495950
--- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola 2009-04-16 08:25:05
EDT ---
rpmlint output is clean.
MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a
duplicate. OK
MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used
consistently. OK
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines. OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
NEEDSFIX
- Source code contains no license headers.
- According to README: "Copyright 2009, distributed under terms of the GPL"
- Attached COPYING is GPLv2.
According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing the correct license tag in
this case is GPL+. Please contact upstream, if this is what they intended.
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL. OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. OK
MUST: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. OK
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. OK
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates or require the package
that owns the directory. OK
MUST: Files only listed once in %files listings. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. NEEDSFIX
- Add COPYING to %doc. Drop webpage/ and just include webpage/index.html.
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. OK
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. OK
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. OK
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. OK
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. OK
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. OK
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. OK
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. 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 492613] Review Request: canto - Atom/RSS feed reader based on ncurses
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492613 Andreas Osowski changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Andreas Osowski 2009-04-16 08:29:34 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: canto Short Description: Atom/RSS feed reader based on ncurses Owners: th0br0 Branches: F-10 F-11 InitialCC: th0br0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496067] Review Request: perl-Net-OAuth - OAuth protocol support library for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496067 --- Comment #1 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-04-16 08:35:02 EDT --- rpmlint silent builds in el5 mock (this time for real) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496067] New: Review Request: perl-Net-OAuth - OAuth protocol support library for Perl
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-Net-OAuth - OAuth protocol support library for Perl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496067 Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-OAuth - OAuth protocol support library for Perl Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkund...@v3.sk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/perl-Net-OAuth.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/perl-Net-OAuth-0.14-1.el5.src.rpm Description: Perl implementation of OAuth, an open protocol to allow secure API authentication in a simple and standard method from desktop and web applications. In practical terms, a mechanism for a Consumer to request protected resources from a Service Provider on behalf of a user. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492133] Review Request: mingw32-libglade2 - MinGW Windows Libglade2 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=492133 Kalev Lember changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ka...@smartlink.ee Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Kalev Lember 2009-04-16 08:40:59 EDT --- Taking for review. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1302131 Rpmlint output contains only expected warnings/errors from a Mingw32 package: $ rpmlint mingw32-libglade2-2.6.4-1.fc11.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw32-libglade2-2.6.4-1.fc11.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint mingw32-libglade2-static-2.6.4-1.fc11.noarch.rpm mingw32-libglade2-static.noarch: E: arch-independent-package-contains-binary-or-object /usr/i686-pc-mingw32/sys-root/mingw/lib/libglade-2.0.a mingw32-libglade2-static.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496067] Review Request: perl-Net-OAuth - OAuth protocol support library for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496067 Marek Mahut changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mma...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mma...@redhat.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 496067] Review Request: perl-Net-OAuth - OAuth protocol support library for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496067 Marek Mahut changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Marek Mahut 2009-04-16 09:07:16 EDT --- 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 496067] Review Request: perl-Net-OAuth - OAuth protocol support library for Perl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496067 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Lubomir Rintel 2009-04-16 09:13:40 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Net-OAuth Short Description: OAuth protocol support library for Perl Owners: foo bar Branches: EL-5 F-10 F-11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492133] Review Request: mingw32-libglade2 - MinGW Windows Libglade2 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=492133
--- Comment #4 from Kalev Lember 2009-04-16 09:15:57 EDT
---
Fedora review mingw32-libglade2-2.6.4-1.fc11.src.rpm 2008-04-16
+ OK
! needs attention
+ rpmlint output
Only expected Errors/Warnings from a Mingw32 package
+ Package is named according to Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
+ Specfile name matches the package base name
! Package follows the Fedora MinGW packaging guidelines
Right now static subpackage's requires line is:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}
But instead it should read:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
+ License meets guidelines and is acceptable to Fedora
LGPLv2+
+ License matches the actual package license
It is also the same as in the corresponding Fedora libglade2 package
+ The package contains the license file (COPYING)
+ Spec file is written in American English
+ Spec file is legible
+ Upstream sources match sources in the srpm
d1776b40f4e166b5e9c107f1c8fe4139 libglade-2.6.4.tar.bz2
d1776b40f4e166b5e9c107f1c8fe4139 SRPM/libglade-2.6.4.tar.bz2
+ Package builds in mock (Fedora Rawhide i586)
n/a ExcludeArch bugs filed
+ BuildRequires list all build dependencies
n/a %find_lang instead of %{_datadir}/locale/*
n/a binary RPM with shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun
+ Does not use Prefix: /usr
+ Package owns all directories it creates
+ No duplicate files in %files
+ %files has %defattr
+ %clean contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Consistent use of macros
+ Package must contain code or permissible content
n/a Large documentation files should go in -doc subpackage
+ Files marked %doc should not affect package
n/a Header files should be in -devel
Fedora MinGW guidelines allow headers in main package
+ Static libraries should be in -static
+ Packages containing pkgconfig (.pc) files need 'Requires: pkgconfig'
n/a libfoo.so must go in -devel
n/a -devel must require the fully versioned base
n/a Packages should not contain libtool .la files
Fedora MinGW guidelines allow .la files
n/a Packages containing GUI apps must include %{name}.desktop file
+ Packages must not own files or directories owned by other packages
+ %install begins with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+ Filenames must be valid UTF-8
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495693] Review Request: perl-Syntax-Highlight-Perl6 - Perl 6 Syntax Highlighter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495693 --- Comment #2 from Marcela Maslanova 2009-04-16 09:45:02 EDT --- > - license field could be complicated > This library also includes the following libraries: > STD.pm by Larry Wall (Artistic License 2.0) > JQuery by John Resig (dual licensed under the MIT and GPL licenses). > > more like (GPL+ or Artistic) and Artistic 2.0 and (MIT or GPLv2) ? > It looks like all of them are needed. > - package installs properly. > Error: Missing Dependency: perl(STD) is needed by package This is fixed by providing perl(STD) in this package. > perl-Syntax-Highlight-Perl6-0.040-1.fc11.noarch > (perl-Syntax-Highlight-Perl6-0.040-1.fc11.noarch.rpm) > > - rpmlint has complaints: > perl-Syntax-Highlight-Perl6.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Cursor.pmc 0644 Other scripts in this directory aren't executable. > - final provides are missing (Cursor) and (STD) Cursor should be used only as internal part, so it shouldn't be provided? > t/01-vim.t ... skipped: Text::VimColor is not installed I'll made a review ticket for this requirement and then upload new package with koji build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491566] Review Request: powwow - A console MUD 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=491566 --- Comment #5 from Kalev Lember 2009-04-16 10:27:56 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.smartlink.ee/~kalev/powwow.spec SRPM URL: http://www.smartlink.ee/~kalev/powwow-1.2.14-2.fc11.src.rpm * Thu Apr 16 2009 Kalev Lember - 1.2.14-2 - Remove COPYING from %%doc, because it is needed at runtime. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492133] Review Request: mingw32-libglade2 - MinGW Windows Libglade2 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=492133 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Sailer 2009-04-16 10:25:49 EDT --- Fixed the -static Requires: Spec URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libglade2.spec SRPM URL: http://sailer.fedorapeople.org/mingw32-libglade2-2.6.4-2.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 495693] Review Request: perl-Syntax-Highlight-Perl6 - Perl 6 Syntax Highlighter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495693 --- Comment #3 from Iain Arnell 2009-04-16 10:31:56 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) > > - rpmlint has complaints: > > perl-Syntax-Highlight-Perl6.noarch: E: non-executable-script > > /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Cursor.pmc 0644 > Other scripts in this directory aren't executable. Yep - looks like its caused by the shebang. Rather than use a patch to fix the path, how about just removing it instead? > > - final provides are missing (Cursor) and (STD) > Cursor should be used only as internal part, so it shouldn't be provided? it gets installed and is "use"able - why not provide it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492133] Review Request: mingw32-libglade2 - MinGW Windows Libglade2 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=492133 Kalev Lember changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Kalev Lember 2009-04-16 10:37:01 EDT --- Package 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 492133] Review Request: mingw32-libglade2 - MinGW Windows Libglade2 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=492133 Thomas Sailer changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Thomas Sailer 2009-04-16 10:41:57 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: mingw32-libglade2 Short Description: MinGW Windows Libglade2 library Owners: sailer rjones Branches: F-10 F-11 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 495403] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Storage - An serialization framework for Moose classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495403 --- Comment #7 from Iain Arnell 2009-04-16 10:55:44 EDT --- I'd say file based myself, give the way autoreq currently seems to work ;) But probably best discussed on the list for real rather than as bugspam. Until it's resolved one way or the other, I bow to your experience - whatever you think is best. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495564] Review Request: libguestfs - Access and modify virtual machine disk images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495564 --- Comment #2 from Richard W.M. Jones 2009-04-16 11:18:16 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/libguestfs.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/libguestfs-0.9.9-12.fc11.src.rpm Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1302368 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #10 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-04-16 11:50:48 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #5) > > I would say that bundling SQLite backend to main package is > > undesired solution. > > However, in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483286#c6, Hans de > Goede writes: > > > I know this is optional but in Fedora we always try to enable as much > > features in packaes as possible, even if this drags in a few additional > > dependencies. > > Following this practice, it would be preferred to include the SQLite driver in > the main package, especially since SQLite is relatively small and already a > core part of many packages. > > This would result in a working installation for people that do not read > READMEs. Actually SQLite is rather small and I agree with you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468631] Review Request: libgarmin - C library to parse and use Garmin image 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=468631 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #17 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-04-16 14:00:45 EDT --- Removing the duplicated documentation caused a no-documentation complaint from rpm on the -devel package, but that's not an issue. Otherwise I think this is fine now. 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 496117] New: Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496117 Summary: Review Request: xpyb - Python bindings for XCB Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: txt...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sourceforge.net/project/platformdownload.php?group_id=259513 SRPM URL: http://sourceforge.net/project/platformdownload.php?group_id=259513 Description: Python bindings for XCB -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476979] Review Request: python-libasyncns - Python binding for the libasyncns
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476979 Matej Cepl changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |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 491767] Review Request: nss-ldapd - An nsswitch module which uses directory servers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491767
--- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-04-16 15:37:44
EDT ---
I've been remiss in not getting back to this sooner. I did build and install
it, but unfortinately after a reboot I was stuck without working uid lookups.
nslcd seemed to be running properly at the time. So I guess there's more
debugging to be done, but in the meantime I can go ahead and review the
packaging.
First, therpmlint complaints:
nss-ldapd.x86_64: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
Indeed, the most recent changelog is missing a version.
nss-ldapd.x86_64: E: non-readable /etc/nss-ldapd.conf 0600
This is obviously a security-related file and needs to be hidden.
nss-ldapd.x86_64: W: missing-lsb-keyword Required-Stop in
/etc/rc.d/init.d/nslcd
That seems to be bogus; Required-Stop is optional.
nss-ldapd.x86_64: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/nslcd $prog
nss-ldapd.x86_64: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/nslcd $prog
nss-ldapd.x86_64: W: incoherent-subsys /etc/rc.d/init.d/nslcd $prog
rpmlint can't comprehend most initscripts. These are bogus.
nss-ldapd.x86_64: W: incoherent-init-script-name nslcd
One does wonder why the daemon isn't just called "nss-ldapd", but I guess that
would make sense. Instead the daemon is "nslcd" so it does make sense for the
initscript to carry that name as well.
Any reason for not just using a release of "1%{?dist}"? This doesn't seem to
be a prerelease package so your release number should be a positive integer.
If you're trying to make the initial import of the package have release 1 then
it should be OK although I don't really understand why it would matter.
I'll admit to not comprehending the dependency on pam_ldap.so, but only because
I don't really know what you intend to do with nss_ldap in the future. I'm
guessing that this package really doesn't have any need for pam_ldap, and
you're just trying to make sure that it stays around in the case that nss-ldapd
starts obsoleting nss_ldap. I'm curious as to whether that's really necessary
or if you're just doing some CYA.
There's a test suite present, but it seems to require an existing ldap server
already loaded with test data and it requires the daemon to be running, which
probably rules out running it at build time.
The scriptlets are pretty complex and somewhat scary. I note that installing
this prints 'USELDAP=yes' to the console, which it probably shouldn't. I
suppose the egrep call needs -q or a redirect. Other than that, though, they
seem to work well enough. However, there are some issues with things that are
supported with nss_ldap that are deprecated or not supported with nss-ldapd and
I wonder if it's worth worrying about migrating them?
Starting nslcd:
nslcd: /etc/nss-ldapd.conf:130: option tls_checkpeer is deprecated (and will be
removed in an upcoming release), use tls_reqcert instead
nslcd: /etc/nss-ldapd.conf:131: option tls_cacertfile is currently untested
(please report any successes)
I think something's off with the groupadd stuff:
getent group nslcd > /dev/null || /usr/sbin/groupadd -r -g 55 ldap
Shouldn't it try to add "nslcd" instead of "ldap"? Also, why does this need to
have a specific numbered account? Shouldn't any low UID suffice?
* source files match upstream. sha256sum:
9e1e44a2dcce2851deb8a402a8aabc5163f2bf26f4476109b3dbab7a230a54ac
nss-ldapd-0.6.8.tar.gz
* package meets naming guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
config(nss-ldapd) = 0.6.8-0.fc11.1
libnss_ldap.so.2()(64bit)
libnss_ldap.so.2(EXPORTED)(64bit)
nss-ldapd = 0.6.8-0.fc11.1
nss-ldapd(x86-64) = 0.6.8-0.fc11.1
=
/bin/sh
? /lib64/security/pam_ldap.so
/sbin/ldconfig
chkconfig
config(nss-ldapd) = 0.6.8-0.fc11.1
grep
initscripts
ld-linux-x86-64.so.2()(64bit)
ld-linux-x86-64.so.2(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
libgssapi_krb5.so.2()(64bit)
libgssapi_krb5.so.2(gssapi_krb5_2_MIT)(64bit)
liblber-2.4.so.2()(64bit)
libldap_r-2.4.so.2()(64bit)
libsasl2.so.2()(64bit)
sed
* shared libraries installed; ldconfig called properly.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generic
[Bug 496133] New: Review Request: EMBOSS - The European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: EMBOSS - The European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496133 Summary: Review Request: EMBOSS - The European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: beleg...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/EMBOSS.spec SRPM URL: http://belegdol.fedorapeople.org/EMBOSS-6.0.1-2.fc10.src.rpm Description: EMBOSS is a new, free Open Source software analysis package specially developed for the needs of the molecular biology (e.g. EMBnet) user community. The software automatically copes with data in a variety of formats and even allows transparent retrieval of sequence data from the web. Also, as extensive libraries are provided with the package, it is a platform to allow other scientists to develop and release software in true open source spirit. EMBOSS also integrates a range of currently available packages and tools for sequence analysis into a seamless whole. Reference for EMBOSS: Rice,P. Longden,I. and Bleasby,A. "EMBOSS: The European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite" Trends in Genetics June 2000, vol 16, No 6. pp.276-277 This package is not yet finished, but I thought that bringing the polishing part into public cannot hurt. It builds fine on all primary architectures: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1302809 rpmlint is not silent yet, since I'm not sure how to handle the warnings regarding the executable permissions: EMBOSS.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/profile.d/emboss.sh EMBOSS.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag /etc/profile.d/emboss.csh EMBOSS-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation EMBOSS-java.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/EMBOSS-java-6.0.1/api/makeDocs.csh EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/utils/install-jemboss-server.sh 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/utils/makeJar.csh 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/api/getClasses.pl 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/utils/makeFileManagerJNLP.sh 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/api/makeDocs.csh 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/runJemboss.sh 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/utils/makeJNLP.sh 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm /usr/share/doc/EMBOSS-java-6.0.1/api/getClasses.pl EMBOSS-java.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/utils/keys.sh 0644 EMBOSS-java.x86_64: W: doc-file-dependency /usr/share/doc/EMBOSS-java-6.0.1/api/getClasses.pl /usr/bin/perl EMBOSS-java.x86_64: W: class-path-in-manifest /usr/share/EMBOSS/jemboss/lib/axis/commons-logging.jar EMBOSS-libs.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libeplplot.so.3.2.7 e...@glibc_2.2.5 EMBOSS-libs.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 9 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 491617] Review Request: mingw32-libxml++ - MinGW Windows C++ wrapper for libxml2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491617 Kalev Lember changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ka...@smartlink.ee Flag||fedora-review? Bug 491617 depends on bug 492113, which changed state. Bug 492113 Summary: Review Request: mingw32-glibmm24 - MinGW Windows C++ interface for GTK2 (a GUI library for X) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492113 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED --- Comment #4 from Kalev Lember 2009-04-16 15:52:15 EDT --- mingw32-glibmm24 is now in Fedora and we can go on with this review. - In Rawhide the native Fedora libxml++ package has been updated to 2.26.0, and according to MinGW packaging guidelines the versions should match native package if possible. - Please clean up the %install section. It only makes the spec file unreadable if most of a section contains leftovers that aren't actually used. - Removing *.a in %install section only matches the (needed) import library, because static libraries aren't built (configure --disable-static). It seems unnecessary to first delete the import lib and then manually copy it over from .libs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491617] Review Request: mingw32-libxml++ - MinGW Windows C++ wrapper for libxml2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491617 Kalev Lember changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 474992] Review Request: libirman - Library for IRMAN hardware
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=474992 --- Comment #16 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-04-16 15:54:21 EDT --- This seems to be new: libirman.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/workmanir ['/usr/lib64'] Any idea why that's just showing up 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 446841] Review Request: python-sippy - B2BUA SIP call controlling component
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446841 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2009-04-16 16:05:09 EDT --- This failed to build for me on the current F11 snapshot. Processing files: python-sippy-0-0.4.20090409cvs.fc11.noarch Executing(%doc): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.pHzHPI error: File not found by glob: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-sippy-0-0.4.20090409cvs.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/*.pyc error: File not found by glob: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-sippy-0-0.4.20090409cvs.fc11.x86_64/usr/bin/*.pyo Looks like bug 182498 has been fixed. You'll need to touch those two files so that you can exclude them, or condititionalize the two exclude lines. I personally use the former approach. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494148] Review Request: soci - The database access library for C++ programmers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494148
--- Comment #10 from Denis Arnaud 2009-04-16
16:10:03 EDT ---
The RPM packaging is now fully based on the pristine version 3.0.0
(http://downloads.sourceforge.net/soci/soci-3.0.0.tar.gz) of the SOCI project
(http://soci.sourceforge.net).
[And I have created a "soci-3.0.0" branch on my own Subversion repository
within the OpenTREP project
(http://opentrep.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/opentrep/branches/soci-3.0.0/), so
as to allow further evolutions upstream (on the trunk)]
The updated files are:
Spec URL: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/opentrep/soci.spec?use_mirror=ovh
SRPM URL:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/opentrep/soci-3.0.0-3.fc10.src.rpm?use_mirror=ovh
* The HTML documentation is now just copied into %{docdir}, without further
process.
* Moreover, the general "GNU Autotools compatibility" patch now only contains
configure files and makefiles (and alters those existing in the pristine
tar-ball).
* A full build has been made on Koji for i386
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1302910) and x86_64
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1302916) architectures.
SRPMs can be fetched there as well.
* rpmlint gives no error and no warning (on the specification file, as well as
on source RPM and binary RPM packages).
---
I now wait for your feedback/approval.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495357] Review Request: python-twill - Simple scripting language for Web browsing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495357 Matthias Saou changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #8 from Matthias Saou 2009-04-16 16:52:48 EDT --- Thanks Till and Kevin. All packages built and pushed to all branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494148] Review Request: soci - The database access library for C++ programmers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494148 --- Comment #11 from Denis Arnaud 2009-04-16 16:57:35 EDT --- The files have been moved onto http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org: Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/soci.spec SRPM URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/soci-3.0.0-3.fc10.src.rpm [Patch URLs: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/soci-3.0.0-fix-gcc43-compatibility.patch and http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/soci-3.0.0-fix-gnu-autotools-compatibility.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 493750] Review Request: netcf - a library for managing network configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493750 --- Comment #7 from David Lutterkort 2009-04-16 17:30:44 EDT --- I'll fix up the pkg-config file to use Requires.private in the next release. As for the duplicate CFLAGS, I would realy like to keep NETCF_CFLAGS for development builds, and even if I build with CFLAGS then. Thanks for the thorough 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 493750] Review Request: netcf - a library for managing network configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493750 David Lutterkort changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from David Lutterkort 2009-04-16 17:32:21 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: netcf Short Description: Cross-platform network configuration library Owners: lutter Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494557] Review Request: zatacka - Arcade multiplayer game for 2-6 players on one keyboard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494557 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xav...@bachelot.org --- Comment #1 from Xavier Bachelot 2009-04-16 17:37:19 EDT --- I think SDL_prim should be packaged separately and the bundled version should be removed. Then zatacka needs to be patched to build against the external library. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496166] New: Review Request: sakura - Terminal emulator based on GTK and VTE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sakura - Terminal emulator based on GTK and VTE https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496166 Summary: Review Request: sakura - Terminal emulator based on GTK and VTE Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@christoph-wickert.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/sakura.spec SRPM URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/sakura-2.3.3-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Sakura is a terminal emulator based on GTK and VTE. It's a terminal emulator with few dependencies, so you don't need a full GNOME desktop installed to have a decent terminal emulator. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496167] New: Review Request: lilyterm - Light and easy to use X Terminal Emulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lilyterm - Light and easy to use X Terminal Emulator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496167 Summary: Review Request: lilyterm - Light and easy to use X Terminal Emulator Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@christoph-wickert.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lilyterm.spec SRPM URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lilyterm-0.9.6-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: LilyTerm is a light and easy to use libvte based X Terminal Emulator with a lot of features: * Supports multiple tabs, reorderable tabs and hides the tab tray when there is only one tab * Add, close, swith, move, rename tabs with function keys * Disable/Enable function keys for temporary (use <`> by default). * Shows the foreground running command on tab and/or window title. * Change the font name, size, and window size with right click menu. * User custom function keys (need to edit profile). * Support for User/System profiles. * Supports true transparency if the window manager is composited. * Support for transparent background and background saturation. * Support for text and background color (need to edit profile). * Good support for UTF-8. * Decide the text encoding via environment. Using UTF-8 by default. * Change the text encoding with right click menu. Note: Maybe the description is to elaborate, I know. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496168] New: Review Request: termit - Simple terminal emulator based on vte library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: termit - Simple terminal emulator based on vte library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496168 Summary: Review Request: termit - Simple terminal emulator based on vte library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@christoph-wickert.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/termit.spec SRPM URL: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/termit-2.2.0-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: TermIt is a simple terminal emulator based on vte library with a lot of features: * tabs * bookmarks * sessions * changing tab name * changing font for tabs * encodings (all available from GTK2) * integrated lua interpreter Configuration can be changed via $HOME/.config/termit/termit.cfg file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 468631] Review Request: libgarmin - C library to parse and use Garmin image 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=468631 Fabian Affolter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #18 from Fabian Affolter 2009-04-16 18:12:07 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: libgarmin Short Description: C library to parse and use Garmin image files Owners: fab Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 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 492396] Review Request:php-feedcreator - Create RSS feeds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492396 Gianluca Sforna changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gia...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492396] Review Request:php-feedcreator - Create RSS feeds
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492396 Gianluca Sforna changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #8 from Gianluca Sforna 2009-04-16 18:25:31 EDT --- Ouch, and I did read that page, missing that sentence :( in the case I think I can review this package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495577] Review Request: xsw - A simple slideshow producer and viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495577 --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter 2009-04-16 18:31:25 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > - Any possibility of removing the bundled fonts? > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_fonts_in_other_packages I added a patch and the fonts are removed in the prep section. 'bitstream-vera-fonts' as a requirement added. I not sure if the way of working with symlinks is desired but for now I have no better idea. Perhaps anybody can point me to an example. Here are the updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/xsw.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/xsw-0.2.2-1.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 495950] Review Request: safecopy - Safe copying of files and partitions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495950 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter 2009-04-16 18:45:46 EDT --- Thanks for pointing my mistakes out. (In reply to comment #1) > NEEDSFIX > - Source code contains no license headers. > - According to README: "Copyright 2009, distributed under terms of the GPL" > - Attached COPYING is GPLv2. > > According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing the correct license tag > in > this case is GPL+. Please contact upstream, if this is what they intended. https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&aid=2769572&group_id=141056&atid=748328 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493236] Review Request: xmlfy - Convert text/UTF-8 based output into XML format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493236 --- Comment #7 from arthurguru 2009-04-16 21:46:53 EDT --- Once again thanks for the very accurate feedback Jan. Your analysis is very good. I have an intermediate process to build fedora source from the original source and then build the SRPM from that, but as this is causing another layer of concern I have logged a bug against my own code to get rid of that process. To fix this properly I need to do another formal release which involves more than just Fedora, so in the meantime I have branched the source code for this Fedora project and all changes provided will now come from this branch and in the end will be merged into the next release of xmlfy which is some weeks away. Now the upstream source specified in Source0 (from the branch) IS exactly the same file used in the SRPM. Once again I’ve updated the files with the same names as to not break the links in the original post. Tested ok, rpmlint is still content. Also note the new URL location of Source0: in the spec file. Kind Regards, Arthur Gouros. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472639] Review Request: Scilab - Numerical Analysis toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472639 --- Comment #25 from D Haley 2009-04-16 22:10:18 EDT --- Spec URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/scilab-5.1.1-1.spec SRPM URL: http://dhd.selfip.com/427e/scilab-5.1.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Koji: No, mising deps. rpmlint: $ rpmlint scilab.spec ../SRPMS/scilab-5.1-2.fc10.src.rpm ../RPMS/i386/scilab-5.1-2.fc10.i386.rpm 2&>1 | grep -v lang Changelog: - Upgrade to 5.1.1 - Add patch to change xml-commons-external jarname - Updated LD_LIBRARY_PATH value - Removed patch to fix bug 4052, as this is now in upstream Known issues: *As per above: Still affected by the gluegen-rt/jogl classpath problem. I'm not going to resolve this until gluegen/jogl packages are approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476471] Review Request: fedora-security-guide - A security guide for Linux
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476471 --- Comment #69 from Michael Hideo 2009-04-16 22:25:08 EDT --- Had a discussion with Jens to further understand his concerns. A solution would be do have the .src rpm w/o the version number but the resultant rpms would have the version number. This would ensure that the library system can still track the catalog. This would require a publican change and a policy change within documentation to sync the with tags. Probably best then to remove the tags. I'll poll the teams to check on how editions are being handled. fedora-Deployment_Guide-en-US-11-19.srpm |_ | fedora-Deployment_Guide-11-web-en-US-11-19.rpm |_ fedora-Deployment_Guide-11-desktop-en-US-11-19.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 496166] Review Request: sakura - Terminal emulator based on GTK and VTE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496166 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||splinu...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-04-17 00:44:20 EDT --- *** Bug 234721 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 234721] Review Request: sakura - A terminal emulator based on GTK+ and VTE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=234721 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |DUPLICATE --- Comment #11 from Mamoru Tasaka 2009-04-17 00:44:20 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 496166 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493531] Review Request: perl-Test-Most - Test::Most Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493531 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-04-17 00:44:35 EDT --- As already said please remove following from SPEC Requires: perl(Data::Dumper::Names) >= 0.03 Requires: perl(Exception::Class) >= 1.14 Requires: perl(Test::Deep) Requires: perl(Test::Differences) Requires: perl(Test::Exception) Requires: perl(Test::Warn) >= 0.1 I have tested again with yum install command and I see all those are automatically installed. Also, I have seen in most of your perl package submissions that you also uses BuildRequires: perl >= 0:5.006 This is not needed. Please submit new SRPM -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493531] Review Request: perl-Test-Most - Test::Most Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493531 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? --- Comment #10 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-04-17 00:57:43 EDT --- sorry mistakenly changed flags to fedora-review+ reverting back -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 494820] Review Request: python-pytools - A collection of tools for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=494820 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Parag AN(पराग) 2009-04-17 01:37:04 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock. Koji build => http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1301709 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream. 1cd76f03ac0280d8d22ed4f543812af8 pytools-8.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc files present. + BuildRequires are proper. + defattr usage is correct. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code. + no static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage exists. + no .la files. + no translations are available. + Does owns the directories it creates. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no scriptlets are used. + Not a GUI app. 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 488175] Package Review: ibus-table-extraphrase
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488175 Caius 'kaio' Chance changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(ke...@tummy.com) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488175] Package Review: ibus-table-extraphrase
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488175 --- Comment #22 from Caius 'kaio' Chance 2009-04-17 01:58:09 EDT --- Package Name: ibus-table-extraphrase Short Description: Extra phrase data for IBus Table Owners: cchance Branches: devel InitialCC: i18n-team -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
