[Bug 497682] New: Review Request: libmemcached - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libmemcached - Client library and command line tools for memcached server https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497682 Summary: Review Request: libmemcached - Client library and command line tools for memcached server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@famillecollet.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/libmemcached.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/libmemcached-0.28-1.fc8.src.rpm Mock log: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/libmemcached-mock.log Koji Scratch build : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321061 Description: libmemcached is a C client library to the memcached server (http://danga.com/memcached). It has been designed to be light on memory usage, and provide full access to server side methods. It also implements several command line tools: memcat - Copy the value of a key to standard output. memflush - Flush the contents of your servers. memrm - Remove a key(s) from the server. memstat - Dump the stats of your servers to standard output. memslap - Generate testing loads on a memcached cluster. memcp - Copy files to memcached servers. memerror - Creates human readable messages from libmemcached error codes. - libmemcached is required by some memcached client. I will submit php-pecl-memcached for 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 478683] Review Request: perl-Net-Google-AuthSub - Provides interface to interact with sites that implement Google style AuthSub
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478683 Andy Shevchenko a...@smile.org.ua changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|NotReady| --- Comment #3 from Andy Shevchenko a...@smile.org.ua 2009-04-26 03:01:55 EDT --- I relocated sources to following site: http://starua.com/~andy/Fedora/Fedora.html So, the direct links are: http://starua.com/~andy/Fedora/perl-Net-Google-AuthSub.spec http://starua.com/~andy/Fedora/perl-Net-Google-AuthSub-0.4-1.sh7.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 497465] Review Request: perl-Config-INI - Config::INI 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=497465 Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cw...@alumni.drew.edu --- Comment #4 from Chris Weyl cw...@alumni.drew.edu 2009-04-26 03:21:37 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0) (and Chris, if you're reading, reviewtool refused to submit this - presumably because it found a review for perl-Config-IniHash - where do you want bug reports?) Yah. The searching was a little too... inclusive :) I just pushed out some revisions I'd been meaning to do for a while now; they should address that as well as a bunch of other bits: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/reviewtool/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 #10 from Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com 2009-04-26 03:24:28 EDT ---
in your xmlfy/Makefile you have LDFLAGS = -O2 -s
could you remove -s and add into CFLAGS -g ?
or you could do in %prep add
sed -i 's/CFLAGS=-O2/CFLAGS=-O2 -g/g' xmlfy/Makefile
sed -i 's/LDFLAGS=-O2 -s/LDFLAGS=-O2/g' xmlfy/Makefile
for reason, please see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Debuginfo
otherwise rpmlint complains on empty debuginfo package.
so, my full package review
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
- debuginfo package empty
- Not 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 meet the Packaging Guidelines
- debuginfo package empty
- NOT 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.
- OK
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc
- OK
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
-OK
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
- OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source
- OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
- OK, koji build http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321066
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture
- OK
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
- OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
- OK, no locales available
MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
- OK, no shared library available
MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
- OK, no relocatable package
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
- OK
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
- OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
- OK
MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- OK
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
- OK
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
- OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
- OK, no large documentation
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application.
- OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
- OK, no header files
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
- OK, no static libraries
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for
directory ownership and usability).
- OK, no .pc files
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
- OK, no library files
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
- OK, no devel package
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
- OK, no .la files
MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file
- OK, no gui available
MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
- OK
MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
- OK
MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
- OK
Conclusion, not properly created debuginfo package = does not meet
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Debuginfo_packages
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497686] New: Review Request: perl-Archive-RPM - Work with an RPM
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-Archive-RPM - Work with an RPM Alias: perl-Archive-RPM https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497686 Summary: Review Request: perl-Archive-RPM - Work with an RPM Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/Archive-RPM OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: cw...@alumni.drew.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-Archive-RPM.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~cweyl/review/perl-Archive-RPM-0.04-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: Archive::RPM provides a more complete method of accessing an RPM's meta- and actual data. We access this information by leveraging RPM2 where we can, and by exploding the rpm with rpm2cpio and cpio when we need information we can't get through RPM2. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321073 *rt-0.07 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(arthurg.w...@gmai ||l.com) --- Comment #11 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-04-26 03:52:06 EDT --- arthurguru: you need to find someone to sponsor you before Jan can approve your package. I can sponsor you, but I'd be thankful if you could informal reviews of a package or two before. That's usually done to demonstrate that you are familiar with packaging guidelines. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497688] New: Review Request: php-pecl-memcached - Extension to work with the Memcached caching daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-memcached - Extension to work with the Memcached caching daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497688 Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-memcached - Extension to work with the Memcached caching daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@famillecollet.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/php-pecl-memcache.spec SRPM URL: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/php-pecl-memcached-0.1.5-1.fc8.src.rpm Mock log: http://remi.fedorapeople.org/php-pecl-memcached-mock.log Description: This extension uses libmemcached library to provide API for communicating with memcached servers. memcached is a high-performance, distributed memory object caching system, generic in nature, but intended for use in speeding up dynamic web applications by alleviating database load. It also provides a session handler (memcached). Can't provide koji scratch build as libmemcached not yet available. rpmlint is silent : php-pecl-memcached.src: I: checking php-pecl-memcached.x86_64: I: checking php-pecl-memcached-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497682] Review Request: libmemcached - Client library and command line tools for memcached server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497682 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||497688 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497688] Review Request: php-pecl-memcached - Extension to work with the Memcached caching daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497688 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||497682 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497690] New: Review Request: perl-HTML-GenToc - Generate a Table of Contents for HTML documents
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-HTML-GenToc - Generate a Table of Contents for HTML documents Alias: perl-HTML-GenToc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497690 Summary: Review Request: perl-HTML-GenToc - Generate a Table of Contents for HTML documents Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All URL: http://search.cpan.org/dist/HTML-GenToc/ OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: iarn...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-HTML-GenToc.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~iarnell/review/perl-HTML-GenToc-3.10-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: HTML::GenToc generates anchors and a table of contents for HTML documents. Depending on the arguments, it will insert the information it generates, or output to a string, a separate file or STDOUT. Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321091 *rt-0.07 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488549] Review Request: php-ezc-EventLog - eZ Components EventLog
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488549 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fed...@famillecollet.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@famillecollet.com Flag||fedora-review+ Bug 488549 depends on bug 484509, which changed state. Bug 484509 Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-Base - eZ Components Base https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484509 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2009-04-26 04:40:48 EDT --- REVIEW: + rpmlint is ok php-ezc-EventLog.src: I: checking php-ezc-EventLog.noarch: I: checking 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. + package name ok + spec file name ok + package meet the PHP Guidelines (new update) + License ok : BSD + License is upstream + spec in english and legible + license file in sources is provided + sources match the upstream sources fc076796311c9571a6fe62774d288ef0 EventLog-1.3.tgz + Source URL ok + build on F10.x86_64 + BuildRequires (php-pear = 1:1.4.9-1.2, php-channel(components.ez.no)) ok + no locale + no .so + own all directories that it creates + no duplicate file + %defattr ok + %clean section + use macros consistently + contain code + small documentation not required to run + no devel + no pkgconfig + no sub-package + no GUI + don't own files or directories already owned by other packages + %install start with rm -rf + valid UTF-8 + build in mock (fedora-rawhide-x86_64) + no test suite + scriptlets ok + Final Requires ok /usr/bin/pear php-common = 5.2.1 php-pear(components.ez.no/Base) = 1.5 + Final Provides ok php-pear(components.ez.no/EventLog) = 1.3 php-ezc-EventLog = 1.3-1.fc8 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 497686] Review Request: perl-Archive-RPM - Work with an RPM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497686 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||iarn...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|iarn...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 04:44:15 EDT --- + source files match upstream. 54cc46c5e670796ebd2134f83b0d8a346bfb447c Archive-RPM-0.04.tar.gz + package meets naming and versioning 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. LGPLv2+ + license is open source-compatible. + license text not included upstream. + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + package builds in mock http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321073 + package installs properly. + rpmlint has no complaints: perl-Archive-RPM.noarch: I: checking perl-Archive-RPM.src: I: checking 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. + final provides and requires are sane: perl(Archive::RPM) = 0.04 perl(Archive::RPM::ChangeLogEntry) = 0.04 perl-Archive-RPM = 0.04-1.fc12 = cpio perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(Archive::RPM::ChangeLogEntry) perl(DateTime) perl(English) perl(File::Temp) perl(Moose) perl(MooseX::AttributeHelpers) perl(MooseX::Types::DateTimeX) perl(MooseX::Types::Path::Class) perl(Path::Class) perl(RPM2) = 0.67 perl(namespace::clean) perl(overload) rpm rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 + %check is present and all tests pass. t/00-load.t ... ok t/100-archive-rpm.t ... ok t/101-archive-srpm.t .. ok t/102-changelog.t . ok All tests successful. Files=4, Tests=28, 5 wallclock secs ( 0.05 usr 0.01 sys + 4.67 cusr 0.49 csys = 5.22 CPU) Result: PASS + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no generically named files + code, not content. + documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. + %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the 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 497465] Review Request: perl-Config-INI - Config::INI 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=497465 --- Comment #5 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-04-26 04:49:04 EDT --- After a clean yum localinstall of the packages provided in the link mentioned above, I get : [wo...@wolfy tmp]$ reviewtool --help couldn't load Fedora::App::ReviewTool::Command::import: IPC::System::Simple required for Fatalised/autodying system() at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Fedora/App/ReviewTool/Command/import.pm line 20 BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/lib/perl5/vendor_perl/5.10.0/Fedora/App/ReviewTool/Command/import.pm line 20. Compilation failed in require at (eval 2157) line 3. [wo...@wolfy tmp]$ rpm -q reviewtool -i Name: reviewtool Relocations: (not relocatable) Version : 0.07 Vendor: (none) Release : 1.fc10Build Date: Sun 26 Apr 2009 10:06:43 AM EEST Install Date: Sun 26 Apr 2009 11:42:12 AM EEST Build Host: athena Group : Development/Libraries Source RPM: perl-Fedora-App-ReviewTool-0.07-1.fc10.src.rpm And BTW (wrt Fedora::App::ReviewTool), cpio is included by default in the buildroot and your source URL points to a not yet existing source 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 497665] Review Request: perl-Crypt-CipherSaber - Perl module implementing CipherSaber 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=497665 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||iarn...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|iarn...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 05:12:08 EDT --- + source files match upstream. 2522e3de77fe005f13be3749e629b5234d449429 Crypt-CipherSaber-1.00.tar.gz + package meets naming and versioning 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. GPL+ or Artistic + license is open source-compatible. + license text not included upstream. + latest version is being packaged. + BuildRequires are proper. + compiler flags are appropriate. + %clean is present. + package builds in mock http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321099 + package installs properly. + rpmlint has no complaints: perl-Crypt-CipherSaber.noarch: I: checking perl-Crypt-CipherSaber.src: I: checking 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. + final provides and requires are sane: perl(Crypt::CipherSaber) = 1.00 perl-Crypt-CipherSaber = 1.00-1.fc12 = perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.10.0) perl(Carp) perl(Scalar::Util) perl(strict) perl(vars) rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 + %check is present and all tests pass (with the caveat about Module::Signature) All tests successful. Files=10, Tests=32, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.07 usr 0.02 sys + 0.59 cusr 0.10 csys = 0.78 CPU) Result: PASS + no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. + owns the directories it creates. + doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + no generically named files + code, not content. + documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. + %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the 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 497665] Review Request: perl-Crypt-CipherSaber - Perl module implementing CipherSaber 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=497665 Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org 2009-04-26 06:15:50 EDT --- Thanks for the review Iain. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Crypt-CipherSaber Short Description: Perl module implementing CipherSaber encryption Owners: xavierb Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 EL-5 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491579] Review Request: jjack - JACK audio driver for the Java Sound API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491579 Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se 2009-04-26 07:38:12 EDT --- Fedora review jjack-0.3-1.fc10.src.rpm 2009-04-26 rpmlint: 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. * Package is named according to guidelines * Specfile is named after the package * The package follows the guidelines for a java package using JNI * License is Fedora approved: LGPLv2+ * The License tags in the sources only says LGPL without version. According to the https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing page LGPL without version is equivalent to LGPLv2+. (Note that this is LGPLv2+, not LGPL+, because version 2 was the first version of LGPL.) The version number in the LICENSE file itself is not relevant for (L)GPL. * The LICENSE file is packaged as %doc * Specfile is written in legible English * Sources matches upstream to the extent possible (differences are documented): $ diff -ur SRPM/jjack-0.3 jjack-0.3 Only in jjack-0.3/doc/www: mp3 Only in SRPM/jjack-0.3/doc/www: ogg * Package compiles in mock (Fedora 10) * BuildRequires are sane * Package owns directories it creates * No duplicate files * Permissions are sane and %files has %defattr * %clean clears buildroot * Macros are used consistently * Documentation is in javadoc subpackage * %doc is not runtime essential * Package does not own other's directories * %install clears buildroot * Installed files are valid UTF-8 One small suggestion: The wrapper script passes its arguments on as $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 It is probably better to instead do $@ (including the quotes). This will work better in cases where there are empty arguments () or quoted arguments containing spaces, subtleties that now get lost. 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 481536] Review Request: enano - Enano CMS, a php-based modular content management system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481536 King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(ngomp...@gmail.co | |m) | --- Comment #3 from King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 07:44:14 EDT --- I'm looking into the issues brought up by rpmlinit, but a few things to note. .htaccess.new and config.new.php absolutely must be there because Enano autogenerates .htaccess and config.php during secondary install (either commandline installation or web based installation) I don't know about removing the .htaccess files, since I don't really know how to delete them as part of the build process of the package, but I have moved the data to enano.conf The 403 error was from an accidental redundancy in the enano.conf, which is fixed in my sources now. To fix it locally, just remove the second line in enano.conf AFAIK, the extra libraries bundled are modified a bit to work within Enano I believe. In any case, I don't really think there will be problems keeping it all in one 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 497705] New: Review Request: spawn - Simple tool to run several Linux command-lines in parallel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: spawn - Simple tool to run several Linux command-lines in parallel https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497705 Summary: Review Request: spawn - Simple tool to run several Linux command-lines in parallel Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fab...@bernewireless.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/spawn.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/spawn-0.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Project URL: http://code.google.com/p/spawntool/ Description: spawn is a simple parallel execution utility written to appeal to the Unix mindset. spawn reads shell command lines from stdin, one per line, and then executes them as maximum of N child processes in parallel, and waits for all of the children to exit. If a child process fails with a non-zero exit code, no new children are spawned. Then spawn waits for all existing children to exit and returns the failed exit code. Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321171 rpmlint output: [...@laptop24 i386]$ rpmlint spawn* 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [...@laptop24 SRPMS]$ rpmlint spawn-0.1-1.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480851] Review Request: ccrypt - Secure encryption and decryption of files and 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=480851 --- Comment #11 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-04-26 08:03:19 EDT --- Still are only 3 of 4 test successful passed for i386. There are a lot of compiler errors... Anyway updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/ccrypt.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/ccrypt-1.7-4.fc10.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321176 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495420] Review Request: rapid-photo-downloader - Images downloader for external devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495420 --- Comment #2 from Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org 2009-04-26 08:07:05 EDT --- So here's my review: Here's what I checked and what is OK: source files match upstream: 41d7fb2afe921ec82e040773757d0b1c6257285c rapid-photo-downloader-0.0.8~b7.tar.gz 41d7fb2afe921ec82e040773757d0b1c6257285c ../SOURCES/rapid-photo-downloader-0.0.8~b7.tar.gz package meets naming and versioning guidelines. specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. dist tag is present. build root is correct. license is open source-compatible: GPLv2+ license text not included upstream. latest version is being packaged. BuildRequires are proper. compiler flags are appropriate. %clean is present. package builds in mock. package installs properly. rpmlint is silent. final provides and requires are sane: [fe...@polaris result]$ rpm -q --provides rapid-photo-downloader rapid-photo-downloader = 0.0.8-2.b7.fc11 [fe...@polaris result]$ rpm -q --requires rapid-photo-downloader /usr/bin/python gnome-python2 gnome-python2-gconf gtk2 hicolor-icon-theme notify-python pyexiv2 pygtk2 python(abi) = 2.6 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) = 4.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. owns the directories it creates. doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. no duplicates in %files. file permissions are appropriate. code, not content. documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. no headers. no pkgconfig files. no libtool .la droppings. desktop files valid and installed properly. Here's what I found what seems do need some work: license field matches the actual license: the spec says GPLv2 but the code seems to be GPLv2+ since no specific requirements are mentioned that it is v2 only the spec installs icons but the icon cache is not updated. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets As soon as these problems are addressed I'll approve the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496677] Review Request: nfoview - Viewer for NFO 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=496677 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-04-26 08:51:22 EDT --- Thanks for the review. (In reply to comment #2) Issues: - Unresolved deps on Fedora = 10: terminus-font needs to be terminus-font-x11 fixed - License is GPLv3, but is it GPLv3 only or GPLv3+? see Comment #3 - Desktop file contains the categories GTK;Utility;Viewer; but according to http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html Viewer belongs to Graphics or Office but not to Utilities. You may want to replace it with TextTools during desktop-file-install fixed - Desktop file contains as mime type, but you are not running update-desktop-database, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database -fixed - No need to include PKG-INFO in %doc fixed. There are different opinions about to include this file or not. Updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/nfoview.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/nfoview-1.4-2.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497634] Review Request: perl-App-Daemon - Start an Application as a Daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497634
Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jan.kle...@hp.com
--- Comment #1 from Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com 2009-04-26 08:52:19 EDT ---
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
- OK
[make...@fetaciq result]$ rpmlint perl-App-Daemon-0.06-1.fc11.src.rpm
perl-App-Daemon-0.06-1.fc11.noarch.rpm ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/perl-App-Daemon.spec
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
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 meet the Packaging Guidelines
- 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.
- OK
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file
- OK, no license file present
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- OK
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
- OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
- OK
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
- OK
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture...
- OK
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
- OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro.
- OK, no locales
MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
- OK
MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable
- OK, not relocatable
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
- OK
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
- OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
- OK
MUST: Each package must have a %clean section...
- OK
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
- OK
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
-OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
- OK
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application.
- OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
- OK, no header files
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
- OK, no static package
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig' (for
directory ownership and usability).
- OK, no .pc files
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library files
that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package.
- OK, no .so library
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
- OK, no devel package
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
-OK, no libtool archives
MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,
-OK, no GUI
MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
- OK, perl package
MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). [25]
- OK
MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
- OK
Conclusion: Looks OK, I would rather to have double checking from somebody else
as I'm doing review for perl package for first time.
should we put perl-sig mailing list into CC?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495420] Review Request: rapid-photo-downloader - Images downloader for external devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495420 --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-04-26 09:08:28 EDT --- Felix, thanks for your time to make this review. (In reply to comment #2) license field matches the actual license: the spec says GPLv2 but the code seems to be GPLv2+ since no specific requirements are mentioned that it is v2 only The license is GPLv2+ (mentioned in the source headers) the spec installs icons but the icon cache is not updated. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets fixed Updated files: Spec URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/rapid-photo-downloader.spec SRPM URL: http://fab.fedorapeople.org/packages/SRPMS/rapid-photo-downloader-0.0.8-3.b7.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 481536] Review Request: enano - Enano CMS, a php-based modular content management system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481536 --- Comment #4 from King InuYasha ngomp...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 09:24:37 EDT --- Spec URL: http://kinginuyasha.enanocms.org/downloads/enano.spec SRPM URL: http://kinginuyasha.enanocms.org/downloads/enano-1.1.6-4.20090415hg4babf8545826.fc10.src.rpm I updated the package to the 20090415 Mercurial snapshot of Enano CMS 1.1.x, and I fixed a whole bunch of issues that rpmlint spewed out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495420] Review Request: rapid-photo-downloader - Images downloader for external devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495420 Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org 2009-04-26 09:50:14 EDT --- Since the errors mentioned have been fixed this Package is APPROVED by me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497720] New: Review Request: hunspell-ln - Lingala hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: hunspell-ln - Lingala hunspell dictionaries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497720 Summary: Review Request: hunspell-ln - Lingala hunspell dictionaries Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: caol...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/hunspell-ln.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/caolanm/rpms/hunspell-ln-0.02-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Lingala hunspell dictionaries -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441
--- Comment #15 from Igor Jurišković juriskovic.i...@gmail.com 2009-04-26
10:15:50 EDT ---
Ok, I added icons. But only 16x16,32x32,48x48 to hicolor directory. Other icons
idk where to put.
All scripts from scripts dir(except murmur.ini/init/overlay/user-wrapper) are
included as %doc.
Desktop file is added for mumble.
All things are done now except:
I need to register protocol mumble:// so mumble can use it but in wiki there is
nothing related to register protocols. How to do that?
Mumble-overlay - as I said before I don't understand what really you want with
this. Explain this a little bit more.
Error that throws /etc/init.d/murmur:
root /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SPECS # /etc/init.d/murmur
/etc/init.d/murmur: line 16: /lib/lsb/init-functions: No such file or directory
Usage: servicename {start|stop|status|restart|reload|force-reload|condrestart
root /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SPECS #
OLD SPEC(the one from my last post):
http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/mumble.spec_old
NEW SPEC: http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/mumble.spec
SRPM: http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/mumble-1.1.8-3.fc9.src.rpm
INIT(nothing changed from last post):
http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/murmur.init
DESKTOP: http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/mumble.desktop
btw, did somebody died so nobody answers or my posts are nonsense so everyone
is laughing? :)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495420] Review Request: rapid-photo-downloader - Images downloader for external devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495420 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-04-26 10:49:41 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rapid-photo-downloader Short Description: Images downloader for external devices 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 491579] Review Request: jjack - JACK audio driver for the Java Sound API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491579 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 11:10:44 EDT --- Thanks a lot, I will update the script. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: jjack Short Description: JACK audio driver for the Java Sound API Owners: oget 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 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 Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jan.kle...@hp.com --- Comment #4 from Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com 2009-04-26 11:07:47 EDT --- Hi, 1] md5sum of tarball from Source0 differs from tarball in src.rpm 2] specfile have useless comments # documents #chmod -x debian/* 3] files are listed multiple times Processing files: shutter-0.70.2-2.ppa3.fc10 warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/locale/ar/LC_MESSAGES/shutter.mo warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/locale/bg/LC_MESSAGES/shutter.mo warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/locale/ca/LC_MESSAGES/shutter.mo warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/shutter.mo warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/shutter.mo 4] rpmlint is complaining a lot (on spec file, src.rpm and on final rpm) Please read http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines If you need help, do not hesitate to contact me or anybody from mentors ( https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Getting_Help ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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 Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jan.kle...@hp.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 497705] Review Request: spawn - Simple tool to run several Linux command-lines in parallel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497705 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jussi.leht...@iki.fi Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-04-26 12:07:09 EDT --- Hmm, this looks useful as a complementary to batch queue managers. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 257941] Review Request: hedgewars - 2D tankbattle game with the tanks replaced by hedgehogs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=257941 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bojanpopo...@beotel.rs --- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-04-26 12:10:56 EDT --- *** Bug 491521 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 491521] Review Request: Hedgewars - 2D tankbattle game with the tanks replaced by hedgehogs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491521 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Resolution||DUPLICATE --- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-04-26 12:10:56 EDT --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 257941 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488549] Review Request: php-ezc-EventLog - eZ Components EventLog
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488549 Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 12:23:10 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-ezc-EventLog Short Description: Allows you to log events or audit trails Owners: llaumgui Branches: F-9 F-10 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478617] Review Request: zsync - Partial/differential file transfer client over HTTP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478617 Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fe...@fetzig.org --- Comment #9 from Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org 2009-04-26 12:25:15 EDT --- The zlib that is included in zsync is patched to support some more functions on manipulating the compressed stream. Thus it is not possible to just patch it out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497705] Review Request: spawn - Simple tool to run several Linux command-lines in parallel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497705
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-04-26 12:41:18
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.
OK
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. OK
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
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 497735] New: Review Request: php-ezc-Cache - eZ Components Cache
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-Cache - eZ Components Cache https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497735 Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-Cache - eZ Components Cache Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: llaum...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Cache is a part of eZ Components : https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/php-channel-ezc A solution for caching, supporting multiple backends allowing you to specify the best performing solution for your caching-problem. SPEC: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-Cache.spec SRPM: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-Cache-1.4-1.fc10.src.rpm RPM: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-Cache-1.4-1.fc10.noarch.rpm rpmlint: buil...@enterprise ~ rpmlint rpmbuild/**/php-ezc-Cache* 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Pear CompatInfo: +-+-+---+++ | Files | Version | C | Extensions | Constants/Tokens | +-+-+---+++ | Cache/* | 5.0.0 | 0 | apc| ...CTORY_SEPARATOR | | | | | date | abstract | | | | | hash | implements | | | | | pcre | instanceof | | | | | spl| interface | | | | || private| | | | || protected | | | | || public | | | | || throw | +-+-+---+++ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497736] New: Review Request: php-ezc-Mail - eZ Components Mail
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-Mail - eZ Components Mail https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497736 Summary: Review Request: php-ezc-Mail - eZ Components Mail Product: Fedora Version: 10 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: llaum...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Mail is a part of eZ Components : https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/php-channel-ezc The component allows you construct and/or parse Mail messages conforming to the mail standard. It has support for attachments, multipart messages and HTML mail. It also interfaces with SMTP to send mail or IMAP, POP3 or mbox to retrieve e-mail. SPEC: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-Mail.spec SRPM: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-Mail-1.6.1-2.fc10.src.rpm RPM: http://llaumgui.fedorapeople.org/review/ez_components/php-ezc-Mail-1.6.1-2.fc10.noarch.rpm rpmlint: buil...@enterprise ~ rpmlint rpmbuild/**/php-ezc-Mail* 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Pear CompatInfo: +-+-+---+++ | Files | Version | C | Extensions | Constants/Tokens | +-+-+---+++ | Mail/* | 5.2.1 | 0 | date | ...CTORY_SEPARATOR | | | | | fileinfo | __CLASS__ | | | | | hash | abstract | | | | | iconv | catch | | | | | mcrypt | implements | | | | | pcre | instanceof | | | | | spl| interface | | | | | zip| private| | | | || protected | | | | || public | | | | || throw | | | | || try| +-+-+---+++ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478617] Review Request: zsync - Partial/differential file transfer client over HTTP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478617 --- Comment #10 from Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-26 13:07:04 EDT --- We (Robert Scheck, Toshio Kuratomi, ?Christoph Wickert? and I) already know that. Robert is in contact with upstream (zlib, rync and zsync) to find a solution. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490140 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495310 https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/134 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497705] Review Request: spawn - Simple tool to run several Linux command-lines in parallel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497705 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-04-26 13:06:52 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: spawn Short Description: Simple tool to run several Linux command-lines in parallel 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 490140] Review Request: zsync - Client-side implementation of the rsync algorithm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490140 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||495310 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492165] Review Request: rotoscope - A free rotoscoping 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=492165 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-04-26 14:21:41 EDT --- ping again? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496677] Review Request: nfoview - Viewer for NFO 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=496677 Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-04-26 14:21:12 EDT --- Regarding desktop-file-install I meant suggested to replace Viewer with TextTools --add-category=TextTools; \ --remove-category=Viewer; \ --delete-original Anyway, this is minor. nfoview-1.4-2.fc10.src.rpm 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 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 #18 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-04-26
14:57:04 EDT ---
* About the %bcond_ macros, they shorten the setup of the conditional builds in
the spec file. Compared with what you do currently (evaluate the
--with/--without options, set a default if neither one is defined, throw an
error if both are defined, overwrites the values with options to pass to
%configure), it would reduce to
# Defaults:
%bcond_with empty
%bcond_without mysql
%bcond_without postgresql
%bcond_with sqlite3
%bcond_with odbc
%bcond_with firebird
%bcond_with oracle
%bcond_without nls
where all lines with _with are for features that are off by default and all
with _without are enabled by default. You can toggle these defaults simply by
replacing with with without and vice versa. No other changes (such as
evaluating _with/_without vars or reordering assignment of defaults) are
necessary. You query the features like:
%configure ...
%if %{with foo}
--enable-backend-foo \
%else
--disable-backend-foo \
%endif
%if ! %{with foo}
# feature foo is disabled
# do something
%endif
%if %{with foo}
%package foo
...
%endif
%{?with_foo:BuildRequires: foo-devel}
More examples in the RPM macros definition file.
* Something has truncated/damaged the extras-soci-doc package. It's down to
57KB with an empty main page and only a very few pages that either contain not
much or broken links to non-existent files.
* The soci - extras-soci rename is incomplete:
$ extras-soci-config --libs
-lextras-soci
$ pkg-config --libs extras-soci
-lextras-soci_core
$ rpm -ql extras-soci-devel|grep \.so$
/usr/lib/libsoci_core.so
Plus, currently, even without renamed libs, the extras-soci* packages would
conflict with an installation made with the pristine SOCI tarballs. One could
make the packages conflict explicitly using proper Conflicts: ... tags, but
they are not compatible/interchangable either due to the renamed files (e.g.
the pkg-config file, the M4 macro file, the -config script).
Do you want all the extras-soci* packages to be parallel installable with any
soci* package somebody may add to the dist? Do you want them to become
alternatives, i.e. interchangable and ABI+API compatible?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441 Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||che...@gmail.com --- Comment #16 from Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 15:11:03 EDT --- /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib64/libmumble.so.1 is not a symbolic link library symlinking seems broken. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441 --- Comment #17 from Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 15:17:08 EDT --- the category for the mumble menu entry is broken too: Categories=Audio; Actually the entry is missing AudioVideo which is a must according to: http://standards.freedesktop.org/menu-spec/latest/apa.html maybe Categories=Network;Chat; would fit better. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492895] Review Request: xml-security-c - C++ Implementation of W3C security standards for XML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492895
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-04-26
15:36:57 EDT ---
Some notes for 1.4.0-1:
* Calling autotools
- Please avoid to use autotools as much as possible.
Calling autotools can break things in many ways
For this package, just
---
%prep
%setup -q
sed -i.flags -e 's|-O2 -DNDEBUG|-DNDEBUG|' configure
%build
%configure --disable-static
make %{?_smp_mflags}
---
is enough (and please remove unneeded BuildRequires)
* Timestamps
- Please try to keep timestamps on installed files as
much as possible (for this package, especially for
installed header files).
slightly related:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Timestamps
This package uses install-sh. In this case, usually
---
make install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT CPPROG=cp -p
---
works.
* Filename conflict
---
# yum --disablerepo=\* --enablerepo=koji-11 whatprovides '/usr/bin/xtest'
Loaded plugins: dellsysidplugin2
starlab-4.4.3-5.fc11.i586 : A Software Environment for Collisional Stellar
Dynamics
Repo: koji-11
Matched from:
Filename: /usr/bin/xtest
xml-security-c-1.4.0-1.fc11.i586 : C++ Implementation of W3C security standards
for XML
Repo: installed
Matched from:
Other : Provides-match: /usr/bin/xtest
---
- This means the name %_bindir/xtest is already used by
other packages in Fedora and cannot be used by this package.
Anyway I don't think the name %_bindir/xtest is proper
because its naming is too generic:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts#Binary_Name_Conflicts
* Requires
- For -devel subpackage, please check if all needed Requires
are properly listed.
! For example, (note that I am only saying an example)
%_includedir/xsec/dsig/DSIGXPathHere.hpp contains:
---
26 #include xsec/framework/XSECDefs.hpp
27
28 #include xercesc/util/PlatformUtils.hpp
---
This means that xml-security-c-devel should have
Requires: xerces-c-devel.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441
--- Comment #18 from Igor Jurišković juriskovic.i...@gmail.com 2009-04-26
15:45:24 EDT ---
Thanks for reply Rudolf.
Category AudioVideo wouldn't fit because Mumble isn't video program. So I
changed it to suggested Network;Chat; witch fits better.
About symlink. I don't now why is it broken. Right now mumble libraries are
installed normally without any modifications:
install -p release/libmumble.so* %{buildroot}%{_libdir}/
eg.
libmumble.so - libmumble.so.1.1.8
libmumble.so.1 - libmumble.so.1.1.8
libmumble.so.1.1 - libmumble.so.1.1.8
All of those files are symlinks to libmumble.so.1.1.8. Why would libmumble.so
and *.so.1.1 work and *.so.1 wouldn't work? You have any suggestion how to fix
this problem?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441 --- Comment #19 from Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 16:03:04 EDT --- ll libmumble.so* -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 36044 26. Apr 21:06 libmumble.so -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 36044 26. Apr 21:06 libmumble.so.1 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 36044 26. Apr 21:06 libmumble.so.1.1 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 root root 36044 26. Apr 21:06 libmumble.so.1.1.8 actually they are hardlinks here after installing the resulting mumble binary 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 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441 --- Comment #20 from Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 16:25:48 EDT --- dont want to flood you with issues but: init script doesent work: LANG=C /etc/init.d/murmur start /etc/init.d/murmur: line 16: /lib/lsb/init-functions: No such file or directory Starting murmur: /etc/init.d/murmur: line 30: start_daemon: command not found changing: . /lib/lsb/init-functions to: . /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions resolves that. and changing: start_daemon ... to: daemon ... makes it actually start. to clean up more: /etc/init.d/murmur start Starting murmur: Unknown argument --PIDFile [ OK ] murmur -h shows there is no such commandline switch --PIDFile and the last issue i can spot after looking over it really quick that it is missing lsb headers. look into other init scripts here is an example taken from xinetd: ### BEGIN INIT INFO # Provides: # Required-Start: $network # Required-Stop: # Should-Start: # Should-Stop: # Default-Start: 3 4 5 # Default-Stop: 0 1 2 6 # Short-Description: start and stop xinetd # Description: xinetd is a powerful replacement for inetd. \ # xinetd has access control mechanisms, extensive \ # logging capabilities, the ability to make services \ # available based on time, and can place \ # limits on the number of servers that can be started, \ # among other things. ### END INIT INFO i will checking more and let you know what else i can find. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441
--- Comment #21 from Rudolf Kastl che...@gmail.com 2009-04-26 16:36:09 EDT
---
specfile:
can be removed from the murmur subpackage:
Provides: murmur = %{version}-%{release}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-26 18:08:34 EDT --- EekBoek-1.04.03-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EekBoek-1.04.03-3.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 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 #21 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-04-26 18:08:27 EDT --- EekBoek-1.04.03-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/EekBoek-1.04.03-3.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 497756] Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756 Mat Booth fed...@matbooth.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||486365 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497756] New: Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756 Summary: Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fed...@matbooth.co.uk QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://mbooth.fedorapeople.org/reviews/lpg.spec SRPM URL: http://mbooth.fedorapeople.org/reviews/lpg-1.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: The LALR Parser Generator (LPG) is a tool for developing scanners and parsers written in Java, C++ or C. Input is specified by BNF rules. LPG supports backtracking (to resolve ambiguity), automatic AST generation and grammar inheritance. Packaging notes: - This package is needed to build outstanding parts of eclipse-dtp that we don't yet build. - This is a reasonably ancient version of the package because of eclipse-dtp and unfortunately later versions of LGP have incompatible APIs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497756] Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756
Igor Jurišković juriskovic.i...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||juriskovic.i...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Igor Jurišković juriskovic.i...@gmail.com 2009-04-26
19:37:24 EDT ---
Hi Mat,
first of all this is not official review. I'm in need of sponsor.
URL: http://lpg.sourceforge.net/
It is much better to use macro. If the package name changes you will not need
to change the url too.
URL: http://%{name}.sourceforge.net/
You are using cp to install files. You should use install. Like:
install -pD %{name}javaruntime.jar
%{buildroot}%{_javadir}/%{name}javaruntime-%{version}.jar
When doing symlinks you don't need to change directory. You can do it this way:
ln -s ../%{javadir}/%{name}javaruntime-%{version}.jar
%{buildroot}%{_javadir}/%{name}-%{version}.jar
%description manual
I wouldn't use that small description because many don't now what LPG is. You
could use description of LPG then simply add at the end This is programmers
manual for LPG.
Why are you naming package lpg then later using name lpgdistribution? You
should use the real name of library as the name of the package. If you have
good reason for not doing so comment the spec file.
You are packaging manual files as different package. Why? There are only 2
files. If they are large(definition of large is left to you) package them as
%{name}-doc
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497441] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat 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=497441
--- Comment #22 from Igor Jurišković juriskovic.i...@gmail.com 2009-04-26
19:44:15 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #21)
specfile:
can be removed from the murmur subpackage:
Provides: murmur = %{version}-%{release}
Fixed
INIT:
Fixed: /lib/lsb/init-functions
Fixed: start_daemon
Fixed: --PIDFile - it should be --pidfile
Fixed: lsb header
--chuid isn't working. Looks like that func doesn't exists. Murmur start fine
without it but with user:group root:root witch I don't want. It needs to be
started as murmur:murmur. While looking at /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions I
couldn't find any function that would start murmur as murmur:murmur.
--RunAsDaemon doesn't exist in functions. It would be logical that when u start
app as daemon that it is already started as daemon so I dont see point in this
func?
SPEC: http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/mumble.spec
SRPM: http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/mumble-1.1.8-4.fc9.src.rpm
INIT: http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/murmur.init
DESKTOP: http://78.46.84.75:81/tj/etmain/mumble/mumble.desktop
I just made unofficial review of LPG:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497759] New: Review Request: funcshell - A shell interface to Func
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: funcshell - A shell interface to Func https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497759 Summary: Review Request: funcshell - A shell interface to Func Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: si...@sewell.ch QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec Url: http://silassewell.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/projects/packages/rpms/funcshell/funcshell.spec SRPM Url: http://silassewell.googlecode.com/files/funcshell-0.0.1-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: funcshell is a shell interface to Func. rpmlint [si...@silas result]$ rpmlint funcshell-0.0.1-1.fc10.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [si...@silas result]$ rpmlint funcshell-0.0.1-1.fc10.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. NOTE: I am the creator of this package. NOTE 2: python-cly (https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/python-cly) is available in devel and 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 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 #19 from Denis Arnaud denis.arnaud_fed...@m4x.org 2009-04-26
20:19:03 EDT ---
Thanks for your feedback!
1. %bcond_with: I've integrated your suggestions. The result is indeed much
more compact... and readable! Thanks.
2. (HTML) doc package: the doc/doxygen.cfg still incorporated the
${src_topdir}/extras-soci source code directory, instead of ${src_topdir}/soci.
It has now been fixed. The full API (and source code) is now accessible, and
the main page (index.html) now reproduces the content of the SOCI project
(http://soci.sourceforge.net) main page. The links were broken because the HTML
pages in the doc/local directory had not been migrated to SGML format for
Doxygen to take it into account. I've migrated those files.
3. soci - extras-soci renaming is now fine for extras-soci-config and
pkg-config scripts.
4. (Potential) conflicts with any soci* package. If somebody else wants to
deliver soci* packages, he or she will be more than welcome (!), and we should
join our forces, so that there remain a single set of packages. So, if somebody
reaches a point where a soci* set of packages is fully supported by the SOCI
developer team, that new set of packages will of course deprecate mine, and
that will be an happy end :) And I shall be happy to contribute to that, of
course!
In summary, I do not intend the extras-soci* packages to be parallel
installable with any soci* package somebody may add to the distribution. The
extras-soci* packages do intend to provide SOCI-compatible (ABI+API) libraries.
The updated files for the Extras-SOCI project are as following:
Spec URL: http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/extras-soci/extras-soci.spec
SRPM URL:
http://denisarnaud.fedorapeople.org/extras-soci/extras-soci-3.1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm
And the corresponding Koji builds:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321640 (i586) and
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321642 (x86_64)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 459892] Review Request: rubygem-mocha - Mocking and stubbing 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=459892 --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-26 22:30:01 EDT --- Sorry for the long delay here. - 0.9.5 is current now. :) - There are a bunch of 'warning: File listed twice...' messages, due to listing some files twice in the %files section, can you fix that up? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476527] Review Request: python-zdaemon - Python Daemon Process Control 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=476527 Bug 476527 depends on bug 476524, which changed state. Bug 476524 Summary: Review Request: python-zope-testing - Zope Testing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476524 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476600] Review Request: python-ZODB3 - Zope Object Database: Object Database and Persistence
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476600 Bug 476600 depends on bug 476524, which changed state. Bug 476524 Summary: Review Request: python-zope-testing - Zope Testing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476524 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476528] Review Request: python-ZConfig - Structured Configuration 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=476528 Bug 476528 depends on bug 476524, which changed state. Bug 476524 Summary: Review Request: python-zope-testing - Zope Testing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476524 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476526] Review Request: python-zope-event - Zope Event Publication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476526 Bug 476526 depends on bug 476524, which changed state. Bug 476524 Summary: Review Request: python-zope-testing - Zope Testing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476524 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476523] Review Request: python-zope-proxy - Generic Transparent Proxies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476523 Bug 476523 depends on bug 476524, which changed state. Bug 476524 Summary: Review Request: python-zope-testing - Zope Testing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476524 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476525] Review Request: python-zc-lockfile - Basic Inter-Process Locks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476525 Bug 476525 depends on bug 476524, which changed state. Bug 476524 Summary: Review Request: python-zope-testing - Zope Testing Framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476524 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 476524] Review Request: python-zope-testing - Zope Testing 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=476524 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #6 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2009-04-26 22:41:08 EDT --- Imported and built: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1321776 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497766] New: Review Request: paintdotnet - A mono port of the Paint.NET image editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: paintdotnet - A mono port of the Paint.NET image editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497766 Summary: Review Request: paintdotnet - A mono port of the Paint.NET image editor Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: eric.mo...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: ftp://ftp.zouric.com/public/linux/paintdotnet/paintdotnet.spec SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.zouric.com/public/linux/paintdotnet/paintdotnet-0.1.63-0.6.fc10.src.rpm Description: Paint.NET is an image and photo editing software. It features an intuitive and innovative user interface with support for layers, unlimited undo, special effects, and a wide variety of useful and powerful tools. An active and growing online community provides friendly help, tutorials, and plugins. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492197] Review Request: toot2 - Java models and frameworks for Audio/MIDI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492197 --- Comment #4 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-04-27 00:41:13 EDT --- Upstream split the vst bits into a separate package, so no need to patch them out anymore: Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/toot2.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/toot2-3-0.4.beta2.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: 3-0.3.beta2 - Update to 3beta2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492201] Review Request: tootaudioservers - Toot2 Audio Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492201 --- Comment #2 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-04-27 00:43:16 EDT --- New upstream version in conjunction with toot2 Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/tootaudioservers.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/tootaudioservers-3-0.1.beta2.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: 3-0.1.beta2 - Update to 3beta2 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490588] Review Request: minicomputer - Software Synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490588 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pa...@hubbitus.info 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 492203] Review Request: frinika - Music Workstation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492203 Bug 492203 depends on bug 483376, which changed state. Bug 483376 Summary: Review Request: fluid-soundfont - Pro-quality GM/GS soundfont https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483376 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #1 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-04-27 00:48:13 EDT --- New checkout and some cleanups: Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/frinika.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/frinika-0.5.1-2.510svn.fc10.src.rpm Changelog: 0.5.1-2.510svn - Update to svn revision 510 - Add tritonus_share.jar to the classpath - Fix default soundfont issue - Don't build the AOT bits, since the package requires java 1.5 No rpmlint anymore! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490588] Review Request: minicomputer - Software Synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490588 --- Comment #15 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pa...@hubbitus.info 2009-04-27 00:50:39 EDT --- Oget, sorry. I have done 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 490588] Review Request: minicomputer - Software Synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490588 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pa...@hubbitus.info changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pa...@hubbitus.info -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497766] Review Request: paintdotnet - A mono port of the Paint.NET image editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497766 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|oget.fed...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497756] Review Request: lpg - LALR Parser Generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497756
--- Comment #2 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2009-04-27
00:55:33 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
Hi Mat,
first of all this is not official review. I'm in need of sponsor.
URL: http://lpg.sourceforge.net/
It is much better to use macro. If the package name changes you will not need
to change the url too.
URL: http://%{name}.sourceforge.net/
But on the other hand
- names of the projects very rarely change
- using macros in the URL / SOURCE tags block usage of certain automated
verification tools. And even simple copy / paste does not work any more.
So I beg to differ, but using macros here is not at all much better.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478920] Review Request: globus-xio-popen-driver - Globus Toolkit - Globus XIO Pipe Open Driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=478920 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:06:07 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 478928] Review Request: globus-rsl-assist - Globus Toolkit - RSL Manipulation 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=478928 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:06:58 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 484567] Review Request: php-ezc-File - eZ Components File
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=484567 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:08:47 EDT --- I assume you want a F-11 branch here too... cvs done with F-11 added. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488539] Review Request: php-ezc-Configuration - eZ Components 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=488539 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:11:59 EDT --- cvs done with F-11 branch added. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488538] Review Request: php-ezc-Authentication - eZ Components Authentication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488538 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:10:30 EDT --- I assume you wanted a F-11 branch here. cvs done with F-11 added. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488542] Review Request: php-ezc-Database - eZ Components Database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488542 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:14:33 EDT --- cvs done with F-11 branch added. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 488549] Review Request: php-ezc-EventLog - eZ Components EventLog
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=488549 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:15:34 EDT --- cvs done with F-11 branch added. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490588] Review Request: minicomputer - Software Synthesizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490588 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:18:59 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489795] Review Request: backintime - Simple backup system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489795 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:16:43 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 490380] Review Request: qt-creator - Lightweight and cross-platform IDE for Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=490380 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #14 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:17:49 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491579] Review Request: jjack - JACK audio driver for the Java Sound API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491579 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:21:38 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492773] Review Request: camcardsync - tool for copying photos from a camera card
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492773 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #10 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:23:32 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492950] Review Request: lv2-vocoder-plugins - Add a robotic effect to vocals
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492950 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:25:40 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492971] Review Request: lv2-zynadd-plugins - LV2 port of the ZynAddSubFX engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492971 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:26:35 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #5 from Liang Suilong liangsuil...@gmail.com 2009-04-27 01:24:27 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=341386) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=341386) the latest spec file Jan Klepek, I have corrected the spec file. Rpmlint does no longer complain anything. But now the problem is that rpmbuild add perl(Proc::Simple) to Requires, which does not exist in Fedora official repository. I can make sure that it is not needed. Because the old package which I build can run well on my Fedora 10. I upload the latest spec file as an attachment. Should I obsolete perl(Proc::Simple)?? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 492945] Review Request: lv2-swh-plugins - LV2 ports of LADSPA swh plugins
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492945 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:24:48 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495001] Review Request: bareftp - File transfer client supporting the FTP, FTP over SSL/TLS (FTPS) and SSH File Transfer Protocol (SFTP)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495001 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #12 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:28:05 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495420] Review Request: rapid-photo-downloader - Images downloader for external devices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495420 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:29:35 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 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 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:33:19 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496168] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496168 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:34:20 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497310] Review Request: php-simplepie - Simple RSS Library in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497310 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:36:43 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496701] Review Request: gxmessage - GTK2 based xmessage clone
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496701 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:35:24 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497665] Review Request: perl-Crypt-CipherSaber - Perl module implementing CipherSaber 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=497665 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2009-04-27 01:37:50 EDT --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
