[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 Christoph Wickert [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #28 from Christoph Wickert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-05 16:12:00 EDT --- Robert and I agreed to switch primary ownership. Package Change Request == Package Name: beldi Owners: cwickert, robert -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Comment #29 from Jason Tibbitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-05 16:46:16 EDT --- Is there some reason you can't make this change in the packagedb yourselves? There's no CVS admin action involved 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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Comment #30 from Christoph Wickert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-05 17:28:11 EDT --- How can I do this in packagedb? I have been an owner right from the beginning and have all privileges, still packagedb lists Robert as owner, see https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/beldi -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Comment #31 from Robert Scheck [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-11-05 18:00:44 EDT --- Theoretically packagedb works, in fact when I'm using it, only the flavor broken is available. Anyway solved with help of abadger1999 on #fedora-admin: [23:35:05] rsc who broke packagedb? [23:35:11] abadger1999 rsc: I did. [23:35:12] rsc I'm not able to release an ownership. [23:35:23] abadger1999 rsc: Which page? [23:35:26] rsc abadger1999: I knew that ;) [23:35:31] abadger1999 heh [23:35:32] rsc abadger1999: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/beldi [23:35:47] rsc cwickert shall get owner and I as co-maintainer (so just vice versa change) [23:36:35] abadger1999 rsc: Do you get an error message? [23:36:59] rsc abadger1999: that would made me lucky. Just nothing happens. Even no ajax animation. [23:38:24] abadger1999 rsc: can you try refreshing the page for me and hitting it again. [23:38:31] rsc of course. Hang on. [23:38:44] rsc Refreshed, will click now. [23:38:57] abadger1999 If I'm lucky, you hit the page while I was restarting the servers and they lost the session information. [23:39:00] rsc Clicked to all three butons. [23:39:09] rsc *buttons [23:40:22] rsc abadger1999: anything nice found? [23:41:20] abadger1999 rsc: Nope. I see the request that you put in before but not the one you're putting in now. [23:41:45] abadger1999 Ah hah [23:41:46] rsc maybe the buttons itself are broken? [23:41:47] abadger1999 There it is [23:42:13] abadger1999 Oh wait... That's the login URL [23:42:24] abadger1999 1 minute ago [23:42:43] rsc hmpf. [23:42:57] rsc re-login now. [23:43:13] rsc clicked released ownership again, nothing happend [23:43:53] abadger1999 Let me try... I'm in cvsadmin which sometimes means I can't reproduce the error but worth a shot. [23:44:47] abadger1999 Yeah. Something's broken. [23:45:09] abadger1999 Ah... I updated some of the javascript... since that's static it gets cached. [23:45:17] abadger1999 Let me clear mod_cache on the proxies [23:50:34] abadger1999 rsc: Okay, try again [23:51:26] rsc abadger1999: works. [23:51:28] rsc cwickert: take it. [23:51:39] cwickert rsc: mom... [23:51:41] rsc abadger1999: thank you. So you really broke it? ;) [23:52:36] cwickert abadger1999: I can't take the package from rsc, the button does nothing for me ether [23:52:52] abadger1999 rsc: heh :-) Somewhat [23:52:52] rsc cwickert: haha! [23:53:13] rsc abadger1999: okay, now you've to switch back, that he can take it. Looks like this is maybe the old JavaScript? ;) [23:53:19] abadger1999 cwickert: Refresh the page and try again. I needed to flush the cache on the web servers when I upgraded. [23:54:02] abadger1999 rsc: yeah. The old javascript was in the cache. But it referenced things that are no longer in the new server. So things broke. [23:54:12] cwickert abadger1999: I did reload the page... [23:54:12] abadger1999 after flushing the cache, the new javascript should be being saved. [23:54:23] cwickert let me restart my browser [23:54:53] abadger1999 Hmmm... yeah if it's still broken after that, there's something fishy going on... it's being cached somewhere. [23:55:41] cwickert abadger1999: works now [23:55:54] cwickert rsc: ok, now re-add the permissions you need [23:56:05] abadger1999 cwickert: Cool. [23:56:36] abadger1999 rsc, cwickert: Thanks for letting me know about that. I need to add flush the cache to the TurboGears SOP. [23:57:03] rsc cwickert: done, you've to approve the spam flooding 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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-26 02:05 EST --- beldi-0.9.16-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-15 08:17 EST --- beldi-0.9.16-3.fc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 8 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |CLOSED Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |CURRENTRELEASE Fixed In Version||0.9.16-3.fc8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-15 08:20 EST --- beldi-0.9.16-3.fc9 has been pushed to the Fedora 9 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 02:51 EST --- One note: Please remove unneeded autotool related BuildRequires (autoconf, automake). Also, BuildRequires: cairo-devel, gtk2-devel are somewhat redundant (always required by gtkmm24-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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 06:41 EST --- Thanks Mamoru for pointing that out. Should be minor and I'll fix this before the initial import. Autotool is overleft from times where upstream had broken files there. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: beldi Short Description: Belug Linux Distribution Burner Owners: robert, cwickert Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 11:57 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 14:54 EST --- Package: beldi-0.9.16-3.fc8 Tag: dist-f8-updates-candidate Status: complete Package: beldi-0.9.16-3.fc9 Tag: dist-f9-updates-candidate Status: complete Package: beldi-0.9.16-3.fc10 Tag: dist-f10 Status: complete -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 14:55 EST --- beldi-0.9.16-3.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-14 15:21 EST --- beldi-0.9.16-3.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 13:57 EST --- Christoph, can you please review the package again? I think, I merged all of the changes and suggestions into one updated SRPM: SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9.16-2.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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 16:42 EST ---
Review for 145e2eb18b87a2dc7a12ce237c9c75c1 beldi-0.9.16-2.src.rpm:
OK - MUST: rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/beldi-*
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
OK - MUST: The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
Ok - MUST: The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
OK - MUST: The package meets the Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines
FAIL - MUST: The License field in the package spec file does not match the
actual license: Code is GPLv3+, but License tag is GPLv2+
FAIL - MUST: License text from source is included in %doc, but the License is
out of date (GPLv2)
OK - MUST: The spec file is written in American English
OK - MUST: The spec file for the package is legible
OK - MUST: The sources used to build the package match the upstream source by
md5 420555ec522884dcb771c98c0960a1f5
OK - MUST: The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on i386
FAIL - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, but
gtkglextmm-devel is only needed when building with --enable-opengl. The OpenGL
interface looks really cool and works here and so I suggest to include it. What
do you think?
Pigment support (requires pigment-devel = 0.3 and gstreamer-plugins-base-devel)
is still experimental and does not build here, so I suggest not to enable it.
OK - MUST: The package owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing
OK - MUST: Permissions on files are set properly
OK - MUST: The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
OK - MUST: The package consistently uses macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: The package contains code, or permissible content
OK - MUST: Files included in %doc do not affect the runtime of the application
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives
OK - MUST: The package contains a GUI application and includes a %{name}.desktop
file that file is properly installed with desktop-file-install
OK - MUST: The packages does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages
OK - MUST: The package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install
OK - MUST: All filenames in the package are valid UTF-8
FIX - SHOULD: Please bug upstream to include an updated copy of the license
text.
FIX? - SHOULD: Could you include a German translation of description and
summary?
FIX - SHOULD: Typo in description: less - least, consist - consists.
IMHO the description could be simplified a little:
-
BeLDi, the Belug (Linux) Distribution Burner, is a program designed to burn
distributions. It is designed to require the least administration and knowledge
as possible.
BeLDi has a intuitive graphic user interface where the main screen shows the
available distributions in a list. If the user selects one, he will be asked
which version and architecture he wants to burn. Once the burn procedure starts
a bar shows its progress. All user operations can be completed with the mouse or
a touchscreen.
-
OK - SHOULD: The package builds in mock
OK - SHOULD: The package functions as described
OK - SHOULD: Latest version of the application
So the only blocker is OpenGL. The license text is no real issue for me as long
as you fix the license tag in the spec.
NEEDSWORK
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 17:17 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) FAIL - MUST: The License field in the package spec file does not match the actual license: Code is GPLv3+, but License tag is GPLv2+ FAIL - MUST: License text from source is included in %doc, but the License is out of date (GPLv2) Changed to GPLv3+ in the spec file, sent e-mail to upstream to correct that for the next upstream release. FAIL - MUST: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, but gtkglextmm-devel is only needed when building with --enable-opengl. The OpenGL interface looks really cool and works here and so I suggest to include it. What do you think? I agree with you, enabled now. Thought, that would be catched up automagically once the dependency is satified, but it looks not as it would be the case. FIX - SHOULD: Please bug upstream to include an updated copy of the license text. Done, see above and within your mailbox. FIX? - SHOULD: Could you include a German translation of description and summary? No not really, this is something for specspo package. FIX - SHOULD: Typo in description: less - least, consist - consists. IMHO the description could be simplified a little: I've taken your rewrite now, sounds better. Former description was taken from the Beldi website. NEEDSWORK Done, SRPM: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9.16-3.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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-13 18:26 EST --- (In reply to comment #17) (In reply to comment #16) The OpenGL interface looks really cool and works here and so I suggest to include it. What do you think? I agree with you, enabled now. Thought, that would be catched up automagically once the dependency is satified, but it looks not as it would be the case. It is still experimental and has some bugs, nevertheless I think we should include it because it's not default and can do no harm. I leave the decision up to you. Done, SRPM: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9.16-3.src.rpm OK - MUST: The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license: GPLv3+ OK - MUST: BuildRequires sane OK - SHOULD: Description updated This program definitely has some serious bugs, but we can work on them with upstream once the package is in Fedora. From a reviewers point of view everything is fine, so this 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #199471|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-07-03 14:37 EST --- Created an attachment (id=310949) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=310949action=view) Updated spec for 0.9.16 Take what you like from it and then let's finish this 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-27 14:07 EST --- I don't like the new behavior: When you start for the first time it starts in fullscreen. It creates ~/beldi_settings.xml and downloads new distro config files to ~. When you start beldi for the second time it's no longer in full screen and there are no distros available. :( The newly created beldi_settings.xml defines /home/beldi/iso as target, but you don't create a beldi usr, so (most likely) there is no /home/beldi. Suggestions: beldi_settings.xml should be hidden target should be ~/.beldi/iso by default distro xml files should be moved to ~/.beldi (I don't like a bunch of xml files scattered through my $HOME. With these changes we could at least get beldi into Fedora quickly. We don't have no multi user option, but IMO we could enable this later when beldi is really ready for it. Or we could just add the necessary files for using consolehelper/pam and a README-multiuser to $doc so people who know what they are doing could enable this themselves. The current behavior is very confusing for users. What do you think? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-01-21 17:38 EST --- Christoph, ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Version|devel |rawhide --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-12-16 11:39 EST --- Christoph, can you please review the package again? Andreas did several changes and below is an updated SRPM: SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9.12-1.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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-20 14:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) $HOME/beldi is a bad idea I think, because it can interfere with system-config-users (in the unlikely case someone creates a user called beldi) Sorry, this was nonsense. $HOME/beldi is ok, I accidentally misread /home/beldi. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-19 04:23 EST --- Christoph, Beldi changed and uses now a directory in $HOME unless configured somehow else. Can you please review the package again? SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/beldi-0.9-2.src.rpm Oh and burning CDs on Fedora 7 works without special permissions for me. Fedora Core 6 can't be supported by Beldi right now, because of qemu requirement. EOL of FC6 is reached in a few months as well. Can we restart/go on with the 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, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-19 09:22 EST --- Created an attachment (id=199471) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=199471action=view) My spec for the previous release Note: This spec is out of date for the new version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-19 09:19 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) Christoph, Beldi changed and uses now a directory in $HOME unless configured somehow else. Huh? Beldi changed? But the source is still named beldi-0.9.tar.gz. It's a bad habit to change something without increasing the version. This version is completely different from the previous one , so it should at least be called 0.9.1. In fact I liked beldi in /var/lib. If we use userhelper multiple users could share a single beldi installation, now every user needs to download all the ISOs again, which is more than 20 GB per user! By default beldi now uses /tmp, which is a bad idea, because - now beldi complains that it can't read files already in /tmp - it bears the risk that beldi changes files it can read/write - /tmp will be wiped out on reboot and people will have to start beldi --update and all the downloads again! Even worse: One can't change the download location because of Configuration::Save can't open file /etc/beldi_settings.xml in write mode. So we still need root privileges or beldi needs to store the configuration in ~/.beldi_settings.xml. Oh and burning CDs on Fedora 7 works without special permissions for me. Burning did not work for me with the previous release. There were permission issues for normal users and as root there were problems with wodim, it was probing the wrong devices (/dev/hd* instead of /dev/sd*). With the new version I still see a lot of warnings but at least burning works. Core 6 can't be supported by Beldi right now, because of qemu requirement. I'm not sure if beldi should require qemu because the test with qemu feature doesn't work for most distributions I've tested. Ether not enough RAM or no harddisk, but all the installers fail. This is only useful for those distributions that come with an installable livecd. This version of beldi looks so 'unfinished' to me (look at the configuration page) that I only would allow it to enter rawhide but none of the stable releases. In fact I noticed a regression: The downloader no longer seems to accept file:// as mirror url (I used local copies of the ISOs for testing). I'm attaching my spec, sorry I did not put it into this review before. This is how I would have packaged the previous version. Please do a diff against yours and take what you think is useful. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #199471|My spec for the previous|My spec for the previous description|release |release. ||Edit: The Requires(pre) is ||not necessary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-19 09:36 EST --- Okay, I've to slap upstream. Changing source is worse, but this is an upstream issue, not downstream. But Beldi should take $HOME/beldi or something per default as only one user per machine normally really uses Beldi. Independent of this, Beldi can given another parameter to use a common location for the files it uses. Removing the qemu requirement again is nothing big. Suid is what upstream would like to avoid. Upstream prefers either separate directories or one directory which is read-writable to all users. The last of these solutions is discouraged in Fedora as I got from #fedora-devel. It was also talked with upstream, that a copy of the config file is used in $HOME and /etc is only a fallback/default...but looks like it wasn't done in that way now. Well...the version number 0.9 should indicate some things regarding features and stability ;-) I'll now talk with upstream first. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-09-19 10:11 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) Okay, I've to slap upstream. Changing source is worse, but this is an upstream issue, not downstream. Yes, it's an upstream issue, but it makes tracking changes for us (you as the maintainer) harder. :( But Beldi should take $HOME/beldi or something per default as only one user per machine normally really uses Beldi. And how do you want achieve this if not with userhelper? Independent of this, Beldi can given another parameter to use a common location for the files it uses. $HOME/beldi is a bad idea I think, because it can interfere with system-config-users (in the unlikely case someone creates a user called beldi) /var/lib/beldi is better and follows the FHS. If we use $HOME/beldi we _need_ to create the beldi user during %post. Removing the qemu requirement again is nothing big. Removing qemu from Requires: is no big deal but it leaves us with the Test with qemu button. Suid is what upstream would like to avoid. Upstream prefers either separate directories or one directory which is read-writable to all users. The last of these solutions is discouraged in Fedora as I got from #fedora-devel. I wasn't suggesting to make beldi suid or creating a world writable directory but about using userhelper like we do for revisor and other tools. To me this is the best solution, the fedora way: It guarantees that beldi always is executed as a certain user, so that all users can share a single beldi installation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-31 14:26 EST --- The desktop file is no big deal, but what troubles me is that we need write access to /var/lib/beldi [¹], so we have two possibilities: 1. make /var/lib/beldi writable for a special beldi group and require the user to be added to this group 2. install beldi to /usr/sbin and call it through consolehelper for normal users Robert, what do you prefer? [¹] Have you tested what happens when everything is downloaded? Do we still need special permissions for burning the CDs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-31 17:21 EST --- Good question. I don't know what's better and I also don't know whether we need special permissions for burning the CDs. Option 1 IMHO requires an upstream modification while second could be downstream only, right? Otherwise we would have to maintain a patch for beldi or am I wrong? Second has the issue, that userhelper involves root permissions for beldi which are maybe not required and which could be a security issue?! I'll talk with Andy about it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-28 08:30 EST --- I know the *.desktop file is missing, but I would like to get some support regarding this, as I never did such a thing before. Christoph, do you have the time and interest in reviewing and maybe maintaining or co-maintaining this package as mentioned at the LinuxTag? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 249949] Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: beldi - Belug Linux Distribution Burner https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=249949 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007-07-28 10:04 EST --- Yes, I do. I'll look at this tomorow. Thanks for submitting this review. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
