[Bug 499539] Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for xpath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499539 --- Comment #1 from Yang Yong yy...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 02:01:52 EDT --- Created an attachment (id=342771) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=342771) saxpath spec 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 499539] Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for xpath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499539 Yang Yong yy...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497947] Review Request: libmetalink - A Metalink C 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=497947
--- Comment #14 from Ant Bryan anthonybr...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 02:30:25
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #12)
Now /usr/lib/libmetalink.a is no longer packaged, I take it that's fine?
Spec URL: http://pastebin.ca/1415019
SRPM URL:
http://www.metalinker.org/mirrors/libmetalink/libmetalink-0.0.3-3.fc10.src.rpm
As there is no static library present now you must remove the
Provides: libmetalink-static = %{version}-%{release}
line :)
Ah yes, forgot about that :) Thanks for the help, both of you!
Would it be possible to take a peek at my mulk packaging (bug 497948) once this
one is finished?
Spec URL: http://pastebin.ca/1415078
SRPM URL:
http://www.metalinker.org/mirrors/libmetalink/libmetalink-0.0.3-4.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 496525] Review Request: tritonus - Java Sound API Implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496525 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com Bug 496525 depends on bug 496524, which changed state. Bug 496524 Summary: Review Request: jorbis - Pure Java Ogg Vorbis Decoder https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496524 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 02:51:54 EDT --- I'm taking this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 493527] Review Request: perl-PlRPC - Interface for building pServer Clients
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=493527 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk --- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-05-07 02:53:23 EDT --- Chris: I'll be very thankful if this was in EPEL-5 as well. Could you please request an EL-5 branch (I'd gladly do that if you have a reason for not maintaining it there). Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496525] Review Request: tritonus - Java Sound API Implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496525 --- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 02:58:01 EDT --- Some of the non-versioned jars in /usr/lib/tritonus are copies not symlinks: -tritonus_share.jar -tritonus_core.jar -tritonus_gsm.jar -tritonus_remaining.jar Once this is fixed I'll do the formal 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 497948] Review Request: mulk - Non-interactive multi-connection network downloader with image filtering and Metalink support.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497948 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? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 219979] Review Request: perl-Text-ASCIITable - Create a nice formatted table using ASCII characters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=219979 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk --- Comment #5 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-05-07 03:11:55 EDT --- Chris: I'll be very thankful if this was in EPEL-5 as well. Could you please request an EL-5 branch (I'd gladly do that if you have a reason for not maintaining it there). Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497948] Review Request: mulk - Non-interactive multi-connection network downloader with image filtering and Metalink support.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497948 --- Comment #2 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-07 03:10:05 EDT --- You're missing at least BuildRequires: libjpeg-devel. Doesn't build in mock. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465758] Review Request: perl-Net-Daemon - Perl extension for portable daemons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465758 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk --- Comment #19 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2009-05-07 03:12:46 EDT --- Petr: I'll be very thankful if this was in EPEL-5 as well. Could you please request an EL-5 branch (I'd gladly do that if you have a reason for not maintaining it there). Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499491] Review Request: libtdb - spin off of samba4 package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499491 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 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 497948] Review Request: mulk - Non-interactive multi-connection network downloader with image filtering and Metalink support.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497948 --- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-07 03:21:11 EDT --- Okay, after adding libjpeg-devel builds. However, the package uses its own versions of libmetalink and uri, which is not allowed. You have already packaged libmetalink; there isn't a package of uri yet. You need to make one and patch this package to use the packaged versions of libmetalink and uri. https://gna.org/projects/uri/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499469] Review Request: libtalloc - spin off of samba4 package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499469 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 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 497800] Review Request: perl-Acme-PlayCode - Perl module for enhancement of code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497800 Marcela Maslanova mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499169] Review Request: hunspell-cv - Chuvash hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499169 Caolan McNamara caol...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499487] Review Request: python-coverage - Code coverage testing module for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499487 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? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475017] Review Request: l2fprod-common - In JavaSE missing Swing components, inspired from modern user interfaces
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475017 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 04:02:56 EDT --- l2fprod-common-7.3-5.20090428cvs.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/l2fprod-common-7.3-5.20090428cvs.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 496525] Review Request: tritonus - Java Sound API Implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496525 --- Comment #3 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 04:05:39 EDT --- Uh, I fixed it. What a messed up Makefile... Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/tritonus.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/tritonus-0.3.7-0.2.20090419cvs.src.rpm Changelog: 0.3.7-0.2.20090419cvs - Fix duplicate files issue -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475017] Review Request: l2fprod-common - In JavaSE missing Swing components, inspired from modern user interfaces
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475017 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 04:03:42 EDT --- l2fprod-common-7.3-5.20090428cvs.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/l2fprod-common-7.3-5.20090428cvs.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 475017] Review Request: l2fprod-common - In JavaSE missing Swing components, inspired from modern user interfaces
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475017 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 04:04:23 EDT --- l2fprod-common-7.3-5.20090428cvs.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/l2fprod-common-7.3-5.20090428cvs.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 499137] Review Request: sipwitch - SIP telephony server for secure phone systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499137 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499475] Review Request: python-morbid - A lightweight message queue for bundled deployment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499475 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||panem...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|panem...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 04:30:40 EDT --- Review: + package builds in mock (rawhide i586). koji Build = http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1339067 + rpmlint is silent for SRPM and for RPM. + source files match upstream url 1099adca419e0347d32198557854a2c1 morbid-0.8.6.1.tar.gz + package meets naming and packaging guidelines. + specfile is properly named, is cleanly written + Spec file is written in American English. + Spec file is legible. + dist tag is present. + build root is correct. + license is open source-compatible. + License text is included in package. + %doc is present. + BuildRequires are proper. + %clean is present. + package installed properly. + Macro use appears rather consistent. + Package contains code, not content. + no headers or static libraries. + no .pc file present. + no -devel subpackage + no .la files. + no translations are available + Does owns the directories it creates. + no scriptlets present. + no duplicates in %files. + file permissions are appropriate. + Not a GUI application 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 465758] Review Request: perl-Net-Daemon - Perl extension for portable daemons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465758 --- Comment #20 from Petr Lautrbach plaut...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 04:55:21 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Net-Daemon New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Owners: plautrba -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 465758] Review Request: perl-Net-Daemon - Perl extension for portable daemons
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=465758 Petr Lautrbach plaut...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453861] Review Request: globus-gsi-credential - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Credential 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=453861 Bug 453861 depends on bug 453856, which changed state. Bug 453856 Summary: Review Request: globus-gsi-cert-utils - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Cert Utils Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453856 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Bug 453861 depends on bug 453857, which changed state. Bug 453857 Summary: Review Request: globus-gsi-sysconfig - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI System Config Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453857 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED --- Comment #8 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se 2009-05-07 04:58:01 EDT --- Package available in 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 497863] Review Request: mb2md - Mailbox to maildir converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497863 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 05:02:15 EDT --- mb2md-3.20-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mb2md-3.20-4.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453862] Review Request: globus-gsi-proxy-core - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Proxy Core 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=453862 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+ Bug 453862 depends on bug 453850, which changed state. Bug 453850 Summary: Review Request: globus-openssl - Openssl Library (virtual GPT glue package) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453850 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Bug 453862 depends on bug 453854, which changed state. Bug 453854 Summary: Review Request: globus-gsi-proxy-ssl - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Proxy SSL Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453854 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Bug 453862 depends on bug 453853, which changed state. Bug 453853 Summary: Review Request: globus-gsi-openssl-error - Globus Toolkit - Globus OpenSSL Error Handling https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453853 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Bug 453862 depends on bug 453855, which changed state. Bug 453855 Summary: Review Request: globus-openssl-module - Globus Toolkit - Globus OpenSSL Module Wrapper https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453855 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Bug 453862 depends on bug 453856, which changed state. Bug 453856 Summary: Review Request: globus-gsi-cert-utils - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Cert Utils Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453856 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Bug 453862 depends on bug 453857, which changed state. Bug 453857 Summary: Review Request: globus-gsi-sysconfig - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI System Config Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453857 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED --- Comment #5 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 05:04:14 EDT --- Full review done. - rpmlint: globus-gsi-proxy-core-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation can be ignored - koji rawhide build is fine: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1340380 - This package (globus-gsi-proxy-core) is APPROVED by oget - -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497863] Review Request: mb2md - Mailbox to maildir converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497863 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 05:03:06 EDT --- mb2md-3.20-4.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mb2md-3.20-4.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 453862] Review Request: globus-gsi-proxy-core - Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Proxy Core 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=453862 Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se 2009-05-07 05:10:58 EDT --- Thank you for the review. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: globus-gsi-proxy-core Short Description: Globus Toolkit - Globus GSI Proxy Core Library Owners: ellert Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: Armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Conrad Sanderson conrads...@ieee.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #8 from Conrad Sanderson conrads...@ieee.org 2009-05-07 05:42:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) spec and src rpm updated: http://arma.sourceforge.net/fedora/armadillo.spec http://arma.sourceforge.net/fedora/armadillo-0.6.10-1.src.rpm Anyone out there ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: Armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Conrad Sanderson conrads...@ieee.org changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://arma.sourceforge.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499579] New: Review Request: libxdg-basedir - Implementation of the XDG Base Directory Specifications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: libxdg-basedir - Implementation of the XDG Base Directory Specifications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499579 Summary: Review Request: libxdg-basedir - Implementation of the XDG Base Directory Specifications Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mno...@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://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/libxdg-basedir/libxdg-basedir.spec SRPM URL: http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/libxdg-basedir/libxdg-basedir-1.0.0-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: The XDG Base Directory Specification defines where should user files be looked for by defining one or more base directories relative in with they should be located. This library implements functions to list the directories according to the specification and provides a few higher-level functions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499579] Review Request: libxdg-basedir - Implementation of the XDG Base Directory Specifications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499579 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||libxdg-basedir -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480855] Review Request: bournal - Write personal, password-protected journal entries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480855
Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cassmod...@fedoraproject.or
||g
--- Comment #5 from Christoph Wickert fed...@christoph-wickert.de 2009-05-07
06:03:39 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
---REVIEW BOURNAL---
It would ne bice to know which file was actually reviewed, because the spec
above mentions 1.3-2, but the srpm is 1.3-1. The only thing that is different
so the release, the rest of the spec is the same.
Group Applications/Internet seems wrong to me, I'd rather use
Applications/Productivity or Applications/Text
--
MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb here is that the first package to be installed
should own the files or directories that other packages may rely upon. This
means, for example, that no package in Fedora should ever share ownership with
any of the files or directories owned by the filesystem or man package. If you
feel that you have a good reason to own a file or directory that another
package owns, then please present that at package review time.
OK
FAIL.
The package owns %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/, which it shouldn't, because it
belongs to hicolor-icon-theme already is a requirement of this package.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||499579 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 452427] Review Request: awesome - Extremely fast, small, dynamic and awesome floating and tiling window manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452427 --- Comment #48 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 06:06:50 EDT --- http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/awesome/awesome.spec http://mnowak.fedorapeople.org/awesome/awesome-3.3-0.1.rc1.fc11.src.rpm -- * Thu May 7 2009 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 3.3-0.1.rc1 - 3.3-rc1 Needs libxdg-basedir, see bug libxdg-basedir. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499579] Review Request: libxdg-basedir - Implementation of the XDG Base Directory Specifications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499579 Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||452427(awesome) --- Comment #1 from Michal Nowak mno...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 06:03:13 EDT --- Scratch in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1340407 Rpmlint output: new...@dhcp-lab-124 SPECS $ rpmlint /home/newman/rpmbuild/SRPMS/libxdg-basedir-1.0.0-1.fc11.src.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libxdg-basedir-1.0.0-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libxdg-basedir-devel-1.0.0-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm /home/newman/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/libxdg-basedir-debuginfo-1.0.0-1.fc11.x86_64.rpm libxdg-basedir.spec libxdg-basedir.x86_64: W: no-documentation libxdg-basedir-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 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 498306] Review Request: kde-plasma-stasks - Alternate Task-Switcher plasma applet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498306 Sven Lankes s...@lank.es changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Sven Lankes s...@lank.es 2009-05-07 06:11:52 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: kde-plasma-stasks Short Description: A plasmoid offering an alternate task-switcher. Owners: slankes 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 480855] Review Request: bournal - Write personal, password-protected journal entries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480855 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp --- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-07 06:15:29 EDT --- Also: - This rpm must update GTK icon cache: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache ? By the way, is this a GUI application? If not (i.e. if this is CUI application), installing destop files or hicolor icons is not needed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 472144] Review Request: tvbrowser - Free EPG for over 500 stations.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472144 Bug 472144 depends on bug 475017, which changed state. Bug 475017 Summary: Review Request: l2fprod-common - In JavaSE missing Swing components, inspired from modern user interfaces https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475017 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 475017] Review Request: l2fprod-common - In JavaSE missing Swing components, inspired from modern user interfaces
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=475017 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #26 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-07 06:21:23 EDT --- Thanks. If any updates came on skinlf please let us know on tvbrowser review request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499341] Review Request: php-pear-Text-Diff - Engine for performing and rendering text diffs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499341 Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jan.kle...@hp.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jan.kle...@hp.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jan Klepek jan.kle...@hp.com 2009-05-07 06:53:39 EDT --- Hi Xavier, I will deeply review it during today/tommorow. so far, rpmlint is ok. rpmlint /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SRPMS/php-pear-Text-Diff-1.1.0-1.fc10.src.rpm /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/php-pear-Text-Diff-1.1.0-1.fc10.noarch.rpm SPECS/php-pear-Text-Diff.spec 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. and all other seems ok too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495692] Review Request: tslib - Touchscreen Access 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=495692 --- Comment #2 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 07:00:50 EDT --- This is true, depsite It could have been handled with the rpm dependency extractor. (along with the pkgconfig provides). In Theory, when a .pc file is provided in /usr/lib64/pkgconfig it should already requires pkgconfig.x86_64 which is the only one to own such directory. At least this is what I would expect. Do we have corner case where this is known to produce issue? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498805] Review Request: wavemon - Ncurses-based monitoring application for wireless network 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=498805 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 07:08:44 EDT --- wavemon-0.6-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wavemon-0.6-2.fc9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498805] Review Request: wavemon - Ncurses-based monitoring application for wireless network 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=498805 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 07:08:49 EDT --- wavemon-0.6-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wavemon-0.6-2.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 498805] Review Request: wavemon - Ncurses-based monitoring application for wireless network 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=498805 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 07:08:39 EDT --- wavemon-0.6-2.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/wavemon-0.6-2.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: Armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added 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 489686] Review Request: Armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added 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 489686] Review Request: Armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|chitl...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498714] Review Request: gitg - GTK+ graphical interface for the git revision control 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=498714 --- Comment #3 from James Bowes jbo...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 07:43:57 EDT --- Updated: Spec URL: http://jbowes.fedorapeople.org/rpms/gitg.spec SRPM URL: http://jbowes.fedorapeople.org/rpms/gitg-0.0.3-1.fc10.src.rpm Thanks for the feedback, Jussi. The package now builds in mock under f10 and rawhide. I think the vendor and gconf bits are cleaned up, too. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 491497] Review Request: dmapd - A server that provides DAAP and DPAP shares
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491497 --- Comment #2 from W. Michael Petullo m...@flyn.org 2009-05-07 07:53:09 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/dmapd.spec SRPM URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/dmapd-0.0.10-1.fc10.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499487] Review Request: python-coverage - Code coverage testing module for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499487
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-07 08:10:18
EDT ---
- You don't need BR: python-setuptools on F9. If you build for EPEL, then you
need it, but you won't get the egg files without python-setuptools:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python/Eggs#Providing_Eggs_for_non-setuptools_packages
- python spec file template has -O1 argument to install, maybe you should have
it also?
**
rpmlint output is clean.
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: Optflags are used and time stamps preserved. 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: 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. NEEDSFIX
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
**
No blockers; the package has been
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 489686] Review Request: Armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi --- Comment #9 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-07 08:15:10 EDT --- Chitlesh: are you reviewing the package and sponsoring Conrad? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: Armadillo - |Review Request: armadillo - |fast C++ matrix library |fast C++ matrix library |with interfaces to LAPACK |with interfaces to LAPACK |and ATLAS |and ATLAS -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: Armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686
--- Comment #10 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-07 08:19:28
EDT ---
A few notes:
- gcc-c++, libstdc++-devel are not needed. First, BR libstdc++-devel is
redundant since it's required by gcc-c++, second gcc-c++ is already in the
standard kit installed in the buildroot:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
- Also blas-devel is unnecessary since it's pulled in by lapack-devel.
- The section
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
cp -r -p README.txt LICENSE.txt index.html examples docs_user docs_tech
licenses $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
is unnecessary. Just insert
%doc README.txt LICENSE.txt index.html examples docs_user docs_tech licenses
in the %files section of the main package. Also, note that if the documentation
is large, it should be branched in its own package, which may be the case here.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498714] Review Request: gitg - GTK+ graphical interface for the git revision control 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=498714
--- Comment #4 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-07 08:26:09
EDT ---
rpmlint output:
gitg.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/gconf/schemas/gitg.schemas
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
- The same kind of warnings seem to be made by also other packages that have
gconf schemas so this is probably OK to ignore.
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. NEEDSFIX
- No mixing of %{buildroot} and RPM_BUILD_ROOT!
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. NEEDSFIX
- Time stamps are not preserved, add INSTALL=install -p as argument to make
install.
MUST: Packages containing shared library files must call ldconfig. N/A
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: Debuginfo package is complete. OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK
MUST: Clean section exists. OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK
MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect
runtime of application. NEEDSFIX
- Add ChangeLog to %doc.
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. N/A
MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires: pkgconfig'. N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix then library files
ending in .so must go in a -devel package. N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency. N/A
MUST: Packages does not contain any .la libtool archives. N/A
MUST: Desktop files are installed properly. OK
MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK
MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK
SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from
upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. OK
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499069] Review Request: ghc-rpm-macros - RPM macros for building GHC packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499069 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 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 489686] Review Request: armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686
--- Comment #11 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2009-05-07 08:30:02
EDT ---
Also, you should add %{?dist} to the Release: tag.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497339] Review Request: qmforge - Analysis tools for quantum mechanical calculations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497339 Bug 497339 depends on bug 497338, which changed state. Bug 497338 Summary: Review Request: python-cclib - A library for processing results of computational chemistry packages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497338 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 08:33:48 EDT --- qmforge-2.1-4.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qmforge-2.1-4.fc10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428413] Review Request: Freemind - Mind mapping tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428413 Tarjei Knapstad tarjei.knaps...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tarjei.knaps...@gmail.com --- Comment #24 from Tarjei Knapstad tarjei.knaps...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 08:38:16 EDT --- Could this be reopened? The latest Freemind release candidates (I've tried 0.9.0-RC3 and RC4) work just fine with the OpenJDK VM supplied with Fedora 10 (java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0-15.b14.fc10.i386) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 428413] Review Request: Freemind - Mind mapping tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=428413 --- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-07 08:49:13 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) Could this be reopened? The latest Freemind release candidates (I've tried 0.9.0-RC3 and RC4) work just fine with the OpenJDK VM supplied with Fedora 10 (java-1.6.0-openjdk-1.6.0.0-15.b14.fc10.i386) Please file a new review request and mark this bug as a duplicate of the new one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu --- Comment #12 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2009-05-07 08:55:28 EDT --- Re: comment #9 I can help too (with review/sponsoring) if chitlesh isn't able. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453422] Review Request: songbird - Mozilla based multimedia player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453422 --- Comment #63 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 08:57:30 EDT --- About $ORIGIN, quoting songbird run script: - ## On Solaris we use $ORIGIN (set in RUNPATH) instead of LD_LIBRARY_PATH ## to locate shared libraries. So the ORIGIN rpath seems only used on Solaris System Sorry for the late answear... I miss time. TODO List: review the xulrunner options. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495692] Review Request: tslib - Touchscreen Access 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=495692 --- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-05-07 09:28:23 EDT --- There is no automatic dependency on pkgconfig. The pkgconfigdeps.sh script only evaluates any .pc file's internal dependencies and adds corresponding pkgconfig(foo) RPM Requires/Provides. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495692] Review Request: tslib - Touchscreen Access 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=495692
--- Comment #4 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-05-07
09:51:33 EDT ---
This is right, and there is no isa dependency either.
But after all, Fedora isn't a multiarch distro ( it is a multilibs), one could
say that pkg-config.i386 shouldn't be provided within the x86_64 repository.
And /usr/lib{64}/pkgconfig should be provided by the filesystem instead.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 480855] Review Request: bournal - Write personal, password-protected journal entries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480855 Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org 2009-05-07 09:57:54 EDT --- = REVOKED = the SRPM, i never take a look in the single SPEC-file mh, I'm in the shit. I didn't see the missing Icon-Cache and the incorrect ownage. The desktop file and the icon stuff is not needed and there are dependencies in the X. I have a CUI package with a desktop file, too.. So this wasn't a problem for me. Another thing is that the main dependency ccrypt is not available for ppc64. --- MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line. FAIL! --- Group: yeah, you are right again. I'm awfully sorry for making such a trouble... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497947] Review Request: libmetalink - A Metalink C 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=497947 Ruben Kerkhof ru...@rubenkerkhof.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #15 from Ruben Kerkhof ru...@rubenkerkhof.com 2009-05-07 10:40:29 EDT --- No problem Jussi, the more the merrier :-) Will have a look at mulk as well. This package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495692] Review Request: tslib - Touchscreen Access 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=495692
--- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-05-07
10:55:50 EDT ---
In F11 Rawhide I see automatic dependencies on /usr/bin/pkg-config - ouch! [One
can only hope that createrepo has moved the Provides into the primary metadata,
too.]
pkgconfig.i386 is not published in the x86_64 repo. At least not in the F10
final tree and not in F11 Rawhide either. Without looking into it in detail, I
can't tell what provides /usr/lib/pkgconfig for the 64-bit targets. If nothing
did, it would be a broken dependency.
By default, the old Requires: pkgconfig is fine. It's just 1) that some
packagers start adding Requires: %{_libdir}/pkgconfig instead (see e.g. bug
484849), and 2) you need the arch-specific binary for multi-arch development,
since pkgconfig looks in $libdir/pkgconfig ... so where $libdir=/usr/lib64, it
doesn't look in /usr/lib/pkgconfig, does it? And if one would set
$PKG_CONFIG_PATH, would it handle multilib $libdir correctly?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495692] Review Request: tslib - Touchscreen Access 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=495692
--- Comment #6 from Michael Schwendt bugs.mich...@gmx.net 2009-05-07
11:02:44 EDT ---
At least openchange-devel includes %{_libdir}/pkgconfig -- going to file a bug
now.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458643] Review Request: dansguardian - Content filtering web proxy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458643 Rahul Sundaram sunda...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sunda...@redhat.com --- Comment #22 from Rahul Sundaram sunda...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 11:03:07 EDT --- Ping once more. I will wait for a couple of weeks or otherwise close this review request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499539] Review Request: saxpath - Simple API for xpath
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499539 Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||dbh...@redhat.com, ||overh...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|overh...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review?, ||needinfo?(tcall...@redhat.c ||om) --- Comment #2 from Andrew Overholt overh...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 11:03:26 EDT --- Spot: this package contains source files with the following in their header: http://overholt.fedorapeople.org/saxpath-license.txt What should be put in the license field in the .spec? = Some preliminary questions and comments for Yang: - why are we shipping code that's been dead upstream for almost 5 years? This release is over 7 years old! - please add a URL for the POM file; is it acceptably licensed? - I think you're missing some Requires and Requires(pre), Requires(post) on jpackage-utils for the maven scripts - the maven example in the packaging guidelines uses org.apache.maven as the first argument to %add_to_maven_depmap but this package uses saxpath. Should it be fully-qualified? - the license field will likely need to be updated. Spot can offer guidance here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458643] Review Request: dansguardian - Content filtering web proxy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458643 --- Comment #23 from Felix Kaechele fe...@fetzig.org 2009-05-07 11:08:15 EDT --- I'll open a new one in that case with a new spec. So feel free to close this review if the original reporter doesn't respond. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC 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
--- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2009-05-07
12:04:57 EDT ---
Package Review
==
Package:
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines
[x] Rpmlint output:
Source RPM:
[...@laptop24 SRPMS]$ rpmlint python-zdaemon-2.0.4-1.fc10.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Binary RPM(s):
[...@laptop24 noarch]$ rpmlint python-zdaemon-2.0.4-1.fc10.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable
[x] Buildroot is correct
master : %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
spec file: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license
License type: ZPLv2.1
[x] 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 is included in %doc
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL
Upstream source: 7d358297df480abe93b6565fc0213c34
Build source:7d358297df480abe93b6565fc0213c34
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] Architecture independent packages have: BuildArch: noarch
[!] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly. %find_lang used for locales
[x] %{optflags} or RPM_OPT_FLAGS are honoured
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required
[x] %install starts with rm -rf %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files
[x] Permissions on files are set properly. %defattr(-,root,root,-) is in every
%files section
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x] Package consistently uses macros
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content
[x] Included filenames are in UTF-8
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required
[-] Header files (.h) in -devel subpackage, if present
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackage, if present
[-] Static libraries (.a) in -static subpackage, if present
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present
[-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[-] -debuginfo subpackage is present and looks complete
[x] No pre-built binaries (.a, .so*, executable)
[-] Package contains a properly installed .desktop file if it is a GUI
application
[-] Follows desktop entry spec
[-] Valid .desktop Name
[-] Valid .desktop GenericName
[-] Valid .desktop Categories
[-] Valid .desktop StartupNotify
[-] .desktop file installed with desktop-file-install in %install
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[-] Timestamps preserved with cp and install
[-] Uses parallel make (%{?_smp_mflags})
[x] Latest version is packaged
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available
[?] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock
Tested on: F10/i386
[!] Package should compile and build into binary RPMs on all supported
architectures.
Tested: hhttp://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1340824
[?] Package functions as described
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct
[-] File based requires are sane
[x] Changelog in allowed format
I guess that at the moment not all dependencies are available in F10, F11, and
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 487098] Review Request: Djblets - A collection of useful classes and functions for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487098 Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||487097 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487097] Review Request: ReviewBoard - web based code review tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487097 Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||487098 --- Comment #6 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 12:05:38 EDT --- Adding dependency on the review request you filed for Djblets (bug 487098) since this specfile has a Requires on Djblets. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 453422] Review Request: songbird - Mozilla based multimedia player
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=453422 --- Comment #64 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 12:22:34 EDT --- songbird once first install wants to install fonts. On my system (F-11 installed from a customized livecd) Not all fonts are installed while running the first time license file. This make songbird to request bengali and other asian fonts (via packagekit) which aren't available while watching the license. Once the installation of the fonts is refused with PackageKit, gpk-update-icon crash with this possible indication: (songbird-bin:2333): PkGtkModule-DEBUG: InstallFontconfRessources method invoked. In my opinion, there is a problem both with the license advertising and the installation of recommended plugins. That's rather annoying for a newly created users to have all sort of advertising, specially if the user known well the sunbird license and/or other well known modules. I think that previously, the same kind of problem was raised with firefox which ends to have a less interactive with end-user advertise. (I remember some discussion on GPL not been an EULA that end-user need to accept/reject to use the software but a pure information). The problem about recommended modules is that: in a ideal packagekit world, they should be provided in an safer way (trusted gpg signed package, such as rpm or whatever, from trusted repositories). But since our firefox package doesn't prevent installation of such extension as end-users level, i think it should be perfectly fine. So to sum-up, I would appreciate to have less interactive information on newly created user (so songbird could be usable directly). But this shouldn't prevent this package to be approved. @David Halik, Usually, in order for you to be sponsored, you need to provide a second review, this review was rather big, so this could be optional but remains at the discretion of the sponsort. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458090] Review Request: LuxRender - Lux Renderer, an unbiased rendering 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=458090 --- Comment #20 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-05-07 12:56:50 EDT --- Sorry, You have to install blender and TuxRender first. If you run blender after install both packages the ~/.blener/script directory and all symlinks will been created. I have taken a look on my installation and could found the Texblender export menu entry. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226322] Merge Review: psmisc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226322 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2009-05-07 12:57:52 EDT --- I'm happy. Commit. APPROVED. Thanks everyone! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 426387] Merge reviews to be completed for F9
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=426387 Bug 426387 depends on bug 226322, which changed state. Bug 226322 Summary: Merge Review: psmisc https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226322 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 498736] Review Request: ucommon - Portable C++ runtime for threads and sockets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=498736 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #16 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-07 12:59:37 EDT --- Now I approve this package. --- This package (ucommon) is APPROVED by mtasaka --- Please follow the procedure written on: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join from Get a Fedora Account. After you request for sponsorship a mail will be sent to sponsor members automatically (which is invisible for you) which notifies that you need a sponsor. After that, please also write on this bug for confirmation that you requested for sponsorship and your FAS (Fedora Account System) name. Then I will sponsor you. If you want to import this package into Fedora 9/10/11, you also have to look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/UpdatesSystem/Bodhi-info-DRAFT (after once you rebuilt this package on koji Fedora rebuilding system). If you have questions, please ask 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 458090] Review Request: LuxRender - Lux Renderer, an unbiased rendering 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=458090 --- Comment #21 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 13:04:31 EDT --- (In reply to comment #20) Sorry, You have to install blender and TuxRender first. If you run blender after install both packages the ~/.blener/script directory and all symlinks will been created. Right, and that's the problem... What upstream think about that ? Of course, most blender plugin extensions will be installed next to blender is run. the blender plugin directory isn't meant to be used only by blender, but plugins such as LuxRender should be allowed to store per-user configuration files... I have taken a look on my installation and could found the Texblender export menu entry. right but once blender is first run when LuxRender was previously installed... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499319] Review Request: tcl-snmptools - TCL extension for SNMP support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499319 --- Comment #1 from Bryson Lee bamab...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 13:32:48 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~blee/tcl-snmptools.spec SRPM URL: http://www.slac.stanford.edu/~blee/tcl-snmptools-1.0-2.fc10.src.rpm I updated the specfile to include the --disable-threads command-line option for the configure step. This eliminates a warning from configure when the extension is built against the stock tcl-devel, which disables threading due to fork() problems. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458090] Review Request: LuxRender - Lux Renderer, an unbiased rendering 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=458090 Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #22 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-05-07 13:54:46 EDT --- Good: + Base name of the SPEC files matches with package name. + Package name fits with the naming convention * URI tag shows on proper project homepage * Could downloads sources with spectool -g + Sources in Source package matches with upstream (md5sum: 02174b85917b68ac5f681a4f117b7bd LuxRender_v05_Source.zip 7cb0920c7c77ebaa5d7a721be124a27f LuxBlend_v05_Blender_Exporter.zip) * Package contains several subpackage + Package contains valid license tag + License Tag contains GPLv3+ and BSD as valid OpenSource licenses + Upstream sources contains verbatins copy of the licenses + License note in source files seems to mach license tag + Consistently usage of rpm macros + Proper BuildRoot tag + Buildroot will be cleaned on the start of %install and %clean + Rpmlint is silent on source RPM. + RPM_OPT_FLAGS will honoured. + Debuginfo package contains sources + Koji scratch build works fine. * Local build works fine. * Local install and uninstall works fine. + Start of the application works fine + Menu entry is ok + %files stanza contains no duplicates + Package contains proper %Changelog entries TODO - Please set blender requirement to bleder = 2.48a-21 to make sure, that the script are available in a corret was. - Why you add an Req rom the devel-docs package to the main Package. - Please moveove content of the %doc stanza of the libs subpackage to the main package - Rpmlint complaints on binary RPMs: pmlint LuxRender-* LuxRender.x86_64: W: no-documentation LuxRender-blender.x86_64: W: no-documentation LuxRender-blender.x86_64: E: wrong-script-interpreter /usr/share/blender/scripts/LuxBlend_0.1.py BPY OK.: Blender specific LuxRender-blender.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/blender/scripts/LuxBlend_0.1.py 0644 Should be fixed. LuxRender-blender.x86_64: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/blender/scripts/LuxBlend_0.1.py Should be fixed. LuxRender-core.x86_64: W: no-documentation OK. LuxRender-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation OK. LuxRender-lib.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/liblux.so.1.0 e...@glibc_2.2.5 May be OK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 458090] Review Request: LuxRender - Lux Renderer, an unbiased rendering 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=458090 --- Comment #23 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2009-05-07 13:58:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #21) (In reply to comment #20) Sorry, You have to install blender and TuxRender first. If you run blender after install both packages the ~/.blener/script directory and all symlinks will been created. Right, and that's the problem... What upstream think about that ? Which upstream? Of course, most blender plugin extensions will be installed next to blender is run. the blender plugin directory isn't meant to be used only by blender, but plugins such as LuxRender should be allowed to store per-user configuration files... ??? I have taken a look on my installation and could found the Texblender export menu entry. right but once blender is first run when LuxRender was previously installed... Yes, Yout must install LuxRender first, before you can see this entries. What is your issue? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499137] Review Request: sipwitch - SIP telephony server for secure phone systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499137
--- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2009-05-07
14:29:45 EDT ---
Created an attachment (id=342909)
-- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=342909)
rpmlint on x86_64 (after fixing rpath and so on)
For 0.5.4-1:
* BR
- BR: pkgconfig is not needed because ucommon-devel
has Requiers: pkgconfig
(Note that any packages containing pkgconfig .pc file
should have Requires: pkgconfig)
- By the way would you check if some version specific
dependency for BuildRequires (not Requires) is really
needed?
* Internal dependency
- Is it safe that sipwitch-snmp subpackage does not depend
on sipwitch?
* Patch0 vs %patch
- On rawhide %patch is rejected when you use Patch0:.
You should use Patch: - %patch or Patch0: - %patch0.
* rpath
Ref:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath
- On x86_64 the rebuilt binaries have unneeded rpath:
-
sipwitch-plugin-forward.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/sipwitch/forward.so ['/usr/lib64']
sipwitch-plugin-rtpproxy.x86_64:E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/sipwitch/rtpproxy.so ['/usr/lib64']
sipwitch-plugin-scripting.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/sipwitch/scripting.so ['/usr/lib64']
sipwitch-plugin-subscriber.x86_64: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/sipwitch/subscriber.so ['/usr/lib64']
sipwitch-plugin-zeroconf.x86_64:E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
/usr/lib64/sipwitch/zeroconf.so ['/usr/lib64']
-
Fedora requests to remove these rpaths.
This can be removed by the below (I usually do the following)
-
%prep
%setup -q
%patch -p0
sed -i.rpath -e \
'/sys_lib_dlsearch_path_spec/s|/usr/lib |/usr/lib /usr/lib64 /lib /lib64 |' \
configure
%build
%configure \
-
(note that the way recommended in the wiki often breaks
linkage against libraries rebuilt from the same source)
* stripping binaries
- Some of the binaries are stripped:
-
1660 DEBUG: + /usr/bin/make
DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/sipwitch-0.5.4-1.1.fc11.x86_64
'INSTALL=install -p' swig-python
.
1685 DEBUG: g++ -pthread -shared -lc -Wno-variadic-macros -Wno-long-long
-fexceptions -DNEW_STDCPP -pthread -fno-check-new -finline -fvisibility=hidden
-DUCOMMON_VISIBILITY=1 -I/builddir/build/BUILD/sipwitch-0.5.4/inc
-I/builddir/build/BUILD/sipwitch-0.5.4 build/temp.linux-x86_64-2.6/wrapper.o
-L/usr/lib64 -lpython2.6 -lucommon -o _sipwitch.so
1686 DEBUG: /bin/sh /builddir/build/BUILD/sipwitch-0.5.4/autoconf/install-sh
-d /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/sipwitch-0.5.4-1.1.fc11.x86_64`python -c 'from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print get_python_lib()'`
1687 DEBUG: /bin/sh /builddir/build/BUILD/sipwitch-0.5.4/autoconf/install-sh
-d /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/sipwitch-0.5.4-1.1.fc11.x86_64`python -c 'from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print get_python_lib(1)'`
1688 DEBUG: strip _sipwitch.so
.
1692 DEBUG: + /usr/bin/make
DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/sipwitch-0.5.4-1.1.fc11.x86_64
'INSTALL=install -p' swig-php5
1698 DEBUG: g++ -shared -module -shared -avoid-version -o sipwitch.so
wrapper.o -lucommon -lc
1699 DEBUG: /bin/sh /builddir/build/BUILD/sipwitch-0.5.4/autoconf/install-sh
-d /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/sipwitch-0.5.4-1.1.fc11.x86_64`php-config
--extension-dir`
1700 DEBUG: strip sipwitch.so
-
To create debuginfo rpm correctly, binaries must not be stripped
before %install ends. ref:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Debuginfo
For this package, the following will prevent this strip:
-
%build
export STRIP=/bin/true
%configure --with-pkg-config --disable-static
%{__make} %{?_smp_mflags}
-
* Automated autotools call
- At some point autotools are automatically called after configure -
make is executed:
-
1660 DEBUG: + /usr/bin/make
DESTDIR=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/sipwitch-0.5.4-1.1.fc11.x86_64
'INSTALL=install -p' swig-python
1661 DEBUG: (cd swig ; make python-swig)
1662 DEBUG: make[1]: Entering directory
`/builddir/build/BUILD/sipwitch-0.5.4/swig'
1663 DEBUG: cd .. /bin/sh
/builddir/build/BUILD/sipwitch-0.5.4/autoconf/missing --run automake-1.10 --gnu
swig/Makefile
1664 DEBUG: cd .. /bin/sh ./config.status
[Bug 499093] Review Request: perl-HTML-WikiConverter - Perl module to convert HTML to wiki markup
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499093 Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no changed: What|Removed |Added CC||terje...@phys.ntnu.no --- Comment #7 from Terje Røsten terje...@phys.ntnu.no 2009-05-07 15:05:13 EDT --- Too late now, however did you see this? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=302271 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 226204] Merge Review: nss
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226204 Kai Engert (kaie) keng...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(keng...@redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #6 from Kai Engert (kaie) keng...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 16:21:03 EDT --- Jon, you said your build initially failed, but then it worked. What local changes did you apply to make it work? Do you have a patch? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495564] Review Request: libguestfs - Access and modify virtual machine disk images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495564 --- Comment #17 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 16:26:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #10) Please specify prototyping behavior for Guestfs.xs (see perlxs manual) Is it worth addressing the please specify... part? This is fixed by this commit: http://git.et.redhat.com/?p=libguestfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=672c4ba257924c3e64836c08fb3b55bc4a6b2aba (In reply to comment #11) In src/guestfs.c, you probably want to use a read wrapper so you don't have to worry about EINTR and EAGAIN (the code should retry, not fail in those cases). It looks like there are a few others that would benefit. This should fix it: http://git.et.redhat.com/?p=libguestfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=bb349b05333aa5bf87a3882f15458d8f7341d807 (In reply to comment #12) Please use an unsigned type for length-only variables like len here: This change isn't exhaustive by any means, but it fixes some of these problems: http://git.et.redhat.com/?p=libguestfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=dd8b152da0e899104fec305159640d08d7d6cdd9 (In reply to comment #13) This realloc (from guestfsd.c) leaks upon failure: http://git.et.redhat.com/?p=libguestfs.git;a=commitdiff;h=427b5f079fd344919ecf568bab2084825aacf606 (In reply to comment #15) Since make check doesn't pass for me, I haven't yet tried running things under valgrind. Have you? No I haven't run it under valgrind, but obviously I should! I've not seen the 'make check' error that we discussed on IRC, and as you know I've tried to reproduce your setup quite closely. I've now built libguestfs on RHEL 5 too, which has quite a few differences from Fedora 11. Again, not seen that problem in 'make check' ... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487098] Review Request: Djblets - A collection of useful classes and functions for Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487098 Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dmalc...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 16:49:58 EDT --- Should the package be named python-djblets, rather than djblets/Djblets? See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28python_modules.29 I've taken the liberty of making an updated version of the package that renames it, fixes a few other issues, plus bumps to the latest upstream release (0.5rc1). Hope that's ok. Specfile is here: http://people.redhat.com/dmalcolm/python/python-djblets.spec SRPM here: http://people.redhat.com/dmalcolm/python/python-djblets-0.5-0.1.rc1.src.rpm Both RPM and SRPM are clean when run through rpmlint (rpmlint-0.82-3.el5); (Caveat: I did this on a RHEL5 box, rather than Fedora) Re comment #2: I didn't reformat Ramez' changelog entry, thinking it better to preserve history. rpmlint doesn't seem to complain about 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 495564] Review Request: libguestfs - Access and modify virtual machine disk images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495564 --- Comment #18 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 16:55:07 EDT --- New upstream version: Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/libguestfs.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/libguestfs-1.0.20-1.fc11.src.rpm Koji scratch build of the above: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1341246 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 499743] New: Review Request: jack-keyboard - Virtual keyboard for JACK MIDI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: jack-keyboard - Virtual keyboard for JACK MIDI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499743 Summary: Review Request: jack-keyboard - Virtual keyboard for JACK MIDI Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: oget.fed...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/jack-keyboard.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/jack-keyboard-2.5-1.fc10.src.rpm Description: jack-keyboard is a virtual MIDI keyboard - a program that allows you to send JACK MIDI events using your PC keyboard. It's somewhat similar to vkeybd, except it uses JACK MIDI instead of ALSA, and the default keyboard mapping is much better - it uses the same layout as trackers (like Impulse Tracker) did, so you have two and half octaves under your fingers. rpmlint is silent. koji rawhide build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1341298 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495412] Review Request: flamerobin - Graphical client for Firebird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495412 --- Comment #11 from Philippe Makowski makowski.fed...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 17:25:30 EDT --- since firebird is there now : builds are ok for F-10 : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1341293 but can you help me to find why it failed for Epel ? http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1341334name=build.log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495949] Review Request: kinterbasdb - A Python DB-API 2.0 compliant interface to Firebird
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495949 --- Comment #3 from Philippe Makowski makowski.fed...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 17:36:27 EDT --- can you explain me what is wrong there ? http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=1341339name=build.log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 --- Comment #13 from Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 17:34:49 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9) Chitlesh: are you reviewing the package and sponsoring Conrad? Yes, today I've assigned this bug under my name -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 489686] Review Request: armadillo - fast C++ matrix library with interfaces to LAPACK and ATLAS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489686 --- Comment #14 from Chitlesh GOORAH chitl...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 17:53:30 EDT --- #1 (In reply to comment #10) - Also blas-devel is unnecessary since it's pulled in by lapack-devel. Conrad, here blas-devel is already required by lapack-devel, you can verify this with chitlesh $ rpm -qR lapack-devel blas-devel = 3.1.1-4.fc10 --- here it is lapack = 3.1.1-4.fc10 liblapack.so.3 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 Hence, if it is not important to add it in the spec file. For your next package, use this rpm -qR command to verify where you have unnecessary added redundant dependencies. #2 verify your rpms there is a package caled rpmlint. It helps you verify the quality of your rpms. Try rpmlint -i .rpm for each generated rpms before uploading for review. Any warning or errors should be corrected. The solutions of some common rpmlint warnings are listed on the fedora wiki. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 487097] Review Request: ReviewBoard - web based code review tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487097 --- Comment #7 from Dave Malcolm dmalc...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 17:55:40 EDT --- I've taken Dan's work on top of Ramez's, updated it to the latest release candidate, and fixed some issues. I renamed the Djblets dependency to python-djblets to reflect the change I proposed in bug 487098. Hope this is all OK. Updated specfile is here: http://people.redhat.com/dmalcolm/python/ReviewBoard.spec Updated SRPM is here: http://people.redhat.com/dmalcolm/python/ReviewBoard-1.0-0.4.rc1.src.rpm Output from rpmlint is clean on the SRPM, and on the built RPM gives the output: ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/post-lock.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/pre-lock.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/contrib/tools/post-commit 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/post-unlock.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/post-revprop-change.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/start-commit.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/pre-commit.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/contrib/conf/reviewboard.fcgi.in 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/diffviewer/testdata/new_src/foo.c ReviewBoard.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/db/write-lock ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/post-commit.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/pre-unlock.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/scmtools/testdata/svn_repo/hooks/pre-revprop-change.tmpl 0644 ReviewBoard.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib/python2.4/site-packages/reviewboard/diffviewer/testdata/orig_src/foo.c These appear to all be example files or test data, and thus I don't think they're real problems. Caveat: I'm doing this all on a RHEL5 box, rather than specifically Fedora. How's this looking? Ramez, do you still want to own this package? Dan? I'd be happy to co-maintain. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 495564] Review Request: libguestfs - Access and modify virtual machine disk images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495564 --- Comment #19 from Richard W.M. Jones rjo...@redhat.com 2009-05-07 18:03:13 EDT --- This Koji scratch build enables the tests: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1341318 (still building as I write ...) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 483859] Review Request: libg3d - Library for 3D file/object viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=483859 Guido Grazioli guido.grazi...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||guido.grazi...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Guido Grazioli guido.grazi...@gmail.com 2009-05-07 18:22:19 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3) Hmmm, I guess that I will need some help with this package. Hi Fabian, as suggest by Ed, just add the following two lines to your %configure section to fix the errors reported by rpmlint: %configure sed -i 's|^hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=.*|hardcode_libdir_flag_spec=|g' libtool sed -i 's|^runpath_var=LD_RUN_PATH|runpath_var=DIE_RPATH_DIE|g' libtool As an additional note, check the %doc definitions: just the README file should be enough for -devel package, instead of installing the same files for both main and -devel 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 499749] New: Review Request: unoconv - Tool to convert between any document format supported by OpenOffice.org
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: unoconv - Tool to convert between any document format supported by OpenOffice.org https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=499749 Summary: Review Request: unoconv - Tool to convert between any document format supported by OpenOffice.org Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: oget.fed...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/unoconv.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/unoconv-0.3-3.fc10.src.rpm Description: unoconv converts between any document format that OpenOffice understands. It uses OpenOffice.org's UNO bindings for non-interactive conversion of documents. Supported document formats include Open Document Format (.odf), MS Word (.doc), MS Office Open/MS OOXML (.xml), Portable Document Format (.pdf), HTML, XHTML, RTF, Docbook (.xml), and more. rpmlint is silent -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 497140] Review Request: php-IDNA_Convert - Internationalized domain name to UTF-8 converter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497140 David Nalley da...@gnsa.us changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 2009-05-07 19:14:00 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: php-IDNA_Convert Short Description: Internationalied domain name to UTF-8 converter Owners: ke4qqq Branches: F-9 F-10 F-11 EL-5 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
