[Bug 551723] Review Request: php-pdepend-PHP-Depend - PHP_Depend design quality metrics for PHP 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=551723 --- Comment #5 from Remi Collet 2010-01-30 02:50:52 EST --- About imagick crash, see #559675 (not related to this package, so not blocking the review) My idea - as imagick conflicts with gmagick and is only optional for this package - as pdepend can generate .svg (without any other additionnal lib) - as pdepend can generate other format with "convert" (see previous comment) You probably could remove php-pecl(imagick) dependency. This is YOUR choice (not affecting 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 549604] Review Request: domxml-php4-php5 - XML transition from PHP4 domxml to PHP5 dom module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549604 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added CC||da...@gnsa.us --- Comment #1 from David Nalley 2010-01-30 00:43:26 EST --- php pulls in a lot of dependencies, try php-common instead. Package name doesn't conform to guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/PHP#Naming_scheme Based on my quick checking license field in spec is questionable because they mention LGPL (which would be LGPLv2+) and yet has a LGPLv3 logo. No license in source, so website is the 'canonical reference' for what license they use. It'd be nice for you to contact upstream and ask them for: 1. clarification on which license. 2. To identify specifically which license in source 3. To include a license file. If they only do 1, include text of email exchange as a doc, and won't issue another release. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 549590] Review Request: pChart - A PHP class to build charts.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549590 David Nalley changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||da...@gnsa.us AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|da...@gnsa.us Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from David Nalley 2010-01-30 00:30:07 EST --- Package name doesn't meet the naming guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/PHP#Naming_scheme -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542045] Review Request: php-htmlpurifier - standards-compliant HTML filter 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=542045 --- Comment #6 from David Nalley 2010-01-30 00:25:28 EST --- sorry for letting this sit dormant for so long. This will mean that I need to package the pear channel provider. I'll try and get that up for review shortly. 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/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 #115 from David Halik 2010-01-30 00:00:00 EST --- Can you get a backtrace of the core dump and post a link to it? Honestly, there's nothing I can really do about all the crashes and core dumps unless it's something specific to the packaging that's causing it. 1.4.3 has been giving people problems even from the developers site downloads. Most likely it's because of the gstreamer setup on your install, as always. I'm really starting to wonder if we're going to even be able to run this with system gstreamer libraries... it's a shame. Post a backtrace and I'll look it over. Unfortunately, the developers won't really look at a bug report unless we're using their gstreamer libraries, and we're not. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/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 #114 from gat 2010-01-29 23:50:22 EST ---
I got this problem when I tried to play something the first time.
LoadPlugin: failed to initialize shared library
/home/gat/.mozilla/plugins/nppdf.so [/home/gat/.mozilla/plugins/nppdf.so: wrong
ELF class: ELFCLASS32]
/usr/lib64/songbird-1.4.3/songbird: line 134: 31663 Segmentation fault
(core dumped) "$prog" ${1+"$@"}
So I simply moved it so that it wouldn't be detected. (The flashplayer plug-in
next to it should be the linux alpha 64bits version, if that matters) Then I
received this error report.
/usr/lib64/songbird-1.4.3/songbird: line 134: 31765 Segmentation fault
(core dumped) "$prog" ${1+"$@"}
--The line number remains constant, but the segmentations fault number changes.
This error was just discouraging. What do I do about that?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560176] Review Request: clpbar - Show information about a data transfer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560176 Warren Togami changed: What|Removed |Added CC||wtog...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Warren Togami 2010-01-29 23:25:36 EST --- Not reviewing yet, but is it really a good idea for this package to use such a generic name like /usr/bin/bar? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559856] Review Request: libbsd - Library providing BSD-compatible functions for portability
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559856
--- Comment #5 from Ralf Corsepius 2010-01-29 23:24:57
EST ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> > Actually, I feel this package is not really close to what it intends to be.
>
> What do you mean?
I feel this package is immature and suffers from an inconsistent design.
E.g. it provides
a) /usr/include/vis.h
It is adding a bsd-header to glibc.
b) /usr/include/bsd/*.h
These files only are usable if being explicitly included,
e.g. #include
=> inconsistent design.
Also, it's not clear to me, if -I/usr/include/bsd ... (overriding system
headers with bsd headers) is supposed to work.
I guess, no, because a) from the list above doesn't match with this kind of
usage. AFAIS, the contents of the files below bsd/ seem to be inconsistent wrt.
this kind of usage.
> > Not really. Simply install this library's headers into a subdirectory of
> > %{_includedir}
> Many of them were already in %{_includedir}/bsd
I sense a misunderstanding.
I recommend you to install this packages headers into a subdirectory of
%{_includedir}, e.g. /usr/include/libbsd, such that you would end up with
/usr/include/libbsd/vis.h
...
/usr/include/libbsd/bsd/getopts.h
...
/usr/include/libbsd/bsd/sys/cdefs.h
...
This gets this library's headers out of gcc's default include search path and
circumvents potential conflicts with glibc. Users would explictily have to use
-I/usr/include/libbsd to get libbsd headers pulled in.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560179] New: accountsdialog - An application to view and modify user accounts information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: accountsdialog - An application to view and modify user accounts information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560179 Summary: accountsdialog - An application to view and modify user accounts information Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mcla...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- spec: http://mclasen.fedorapeople.org/accounts/accountsdialog.spec srpm: http://mclasen.fedorapeople.org/accounts/accountsdialog-0.4-1.fc12.src.rpm notes: 1) the dialog depends on a dbus service under review here: bug 560178 2) the dialog depends on the git version of cheese for the webcam functionality. 3) a gdm patch to get the user information from the service is currently under development -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523650] Review Request: qmpdclient - A Qt4 based MPD client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523650 --- Comment #42 from nucleo 2010-01-29 22:57:43 EST --- The other solution is to use cmake. Then patching is not needed. http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/qmpdclient-cmake.spec desktop file installs but it uses icon that installs in wrong place. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560178] New: accountsservice - D-Bus interfaces for querying and manipulating user account information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: accountsservice - D-Bus interfaces for querying and manipulating user account information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560178 Summary: accountsservice - D-Bus interfaces for querying and manipulating user account information Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mcla...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- spec: http://mclasen.fedorapeople.org/accounts/accountsservice.spec srpm: http://mclasen.fedorapeople.org/accounts/accountsservice-0.4-1.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560176] New: Review Request: clpbar - Show information about a data transfer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: clpbar - Show information about a data transfer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560176 Summary: Review Request: clpbar - Show information about a data transfer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: dcantr...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/clpbar/clpbar.spec SRPM URL: http://dcantrel.fedorapeople.org/clpbar/clpbar-1.10.9-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Bar is a simple tool to process a stream of data and print a display for the user on stderr showing (a) the amount of data passed, (b) the throughput of the data transfer, and, if the total size of the data stream is known, (c) estimated time remaining, percent complete, and a progress bar. Bar was originally written for the purpose of estimating the amount of time needed to transfer large amounts (many, many gigabytes) of data across a network. (Usually in an SSH/tar pipe.) NOTES: 1) I named the package 'clpbar' because that's the name of the SourceForge project and the name of the package in Debian. However, the actual command installed is /usr/bin/bar and the manpage is bar(1). 2) I added a %check section to the spec file even though the packaging guidelines don't say anything about that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523650] Review Request: qmpdclient - A Qt4 based MPD client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523650 nucleo changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alekc...@googlemail.com --- Comment #41 from nucleo 2010-01-29 22:09:38 EST --- I think that 'make install' is not working well because not install translations. All files can be installed manually. Here spec which not uses 'make install' http://nucleo.fedorapeople.org/qmpdclient.spec %find_lang not works, so I have used %lang. May be somehow %find_lang can work in this case but I don't know how. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560172] New: Review Request: jvyamlb - YAML processor for JRuby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: jvyamlb - YAML processor for JRuby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560172 Summary: Review Request: jvyamlb - YAML processor for JRuby Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: victor.vasil...@sun.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/jvyamlb.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/jvyamlb-0.2.5-3.fc13.src.rpm Description: YAML processor extracted from JRuby. This review request has been filed, because the package was last updated more than three months ago and it is orphaned: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/jvyamlb -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560172] Review Request: jvyamlb - YAML processor for JRuby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560172 Victor G. Vasilyev changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||541638 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560170] Review Request: jcodings - Java-based codings helper classes for Joni and JRuby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560170 Victor G. Vasilyev changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||541638 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560170] New: Review Request: jcodings - Java-based codings helper classes for Joni and JRuby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: jcodings - Java-based codings helper classes for Joni and JRuby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560170 Summary: Review Request: jcodings - Java-based codings helper classes for Joni and JRuby Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: victor.vasil...@sun.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/jcodings.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/jcodings-1.0.2-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: Java-based codings helper classes for Joni and JRuby. This review request has been filed, because the package was last updated more than three months ago and it is orphaned: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/jcodings -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560169] New: Review Request: bytelist - A java library for lists of bytes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: bytelist - A java library for lists of bytes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560169 Summary: Review Request: bytelist - A java library for lists of bytes Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: victor.vasil...@sun.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/bytelist.spec SRPM URL: http://victorv.fedorapeople.org/files/bytelist-1.0.3-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: A small java library for manipulating lists of bytes. This review request has been filed, because the package was last updated more than three months ago and it is orphaned: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/name/bytelist -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560169] Review Request: bytelist - A java library for lists of bytes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560169 Victor G. Vasilyev changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||541638 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/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 #113 from gat 2010-01-29 20:59:47 EST --- I removed shroedinger and .songbird2 and continue to have songbird die. This also happened in Songbird 1.2 (or whatever the last contributed build was for Fedora 11), but I thought that this was simply because I was running Fedora 12. I installed Fedora twelve on a new partition, but that was over a month ago. My installation is most definitively not "fresh". This crash after about 7 seconds of playing continues to occur. What information can I give to help to solve this problem? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226342] Merge Review: 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=226342 --- Comment #11 from Dave Malcolm 2010-01-29 19:21:30 EST --- I've gone through the patches, adding comments explaining what they all do, and upstream status, as far as possible, in tag "python-2_6_4-13_fc13". I also removed the various commented-out patches. See: http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/python/devel/python.spec?r1=1.164&r2=1.165 There appear to be some places where patches need to be upstreamed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 545039] Review Request: xulrunner-python - Files needed to run Gecko applications written in 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=545039 Sebastian Dziallas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #15 from Sebastian Dziallas 2010-01-29 18:52:53 EST --- This has been built for Rawhide now. Great work everybody! :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 237336] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for X509 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=237336 --- Comment #11 from Wes Hardaker 2010-01-29 18:47:46 EST --- There are simply no build directories for it. We need something like this done: New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 Short Description: Perl OpenSSL bindings for X509 Support Owners: wjhns...@hardakers.net Branches: EL-4 EL-5 InitialCC: I think we need a new bug request for it; sigh... my memory of fedora create-a-new-branch methodology fails me after not having done it for a year (as always). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 547226] Review Request: pgu - pygame addon for making GUIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547226 Florent Le Coz changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(louizat...@fedora | |project.org)| --- Comment #8 from Florent Le Coz 2010-01-29 18:38:04 EST --- Well, in fact I'm just waiting for any approval, or comment, or anything… I (think I) fixed all the issues that were reported on this package. What am I supposed to do, beside making a package, fixing it and waiting for a sponsore...? (by the way, I made some other packages that you could review, if you want) Please tell me what I'm missing :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 557546] Review Request: telepathy-sunshine - Gadu-Gadu connection manager for telepathy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=557546 Patrick Dignan changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dignan.patr...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558685] Review Request: gloobus-preview - A file previewer for
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558685 --- Comment #5 from Julian Sikorski 2010-01-29 17:48:48 EST --- Created an attachment (id=387664) --> (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=387664) icons missing The path is indeed wrong, have a look at the screenshot - icons are missing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558685] Review Request: gloobus-preview - A file previewer for
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558685
--- Comment #4 from Julian Sikorski 2010-01-29 17:33:19
EST ---
--datadir=%{_datadir}/%{name} is strange. This way icons and desktop entries
are sort of hidden from the system.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558685] Review Request: gloobus-preview - A file previewer for
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558685
Julian Sikorski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||beleg...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Julian Sikorski 2010-01-29 17:25:39
EST ---
1. --libdir=%{_libdir} is unnecessary.
2. find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name '*.la' -exec rm -f {} ';' is a less cluttered way
to get rid of libtool archives.
3. make install %{_libdir} DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT is most likely incorrect.
4. The homepage is actually https://launchpad.net/gloobus-preview.
5. You might want to use one more %{version} macro in the source url.
Also, wouldn't it be possible to ship a gconf schema with the entries readme is
asking to create? Not that many users really read the documentation.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 469931] Review Request: ipmiutil - IPMI Management Utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=469931 --- Comment #20 from Andy Cress 2010-01-29 17:27:24 EST --- OK, I found the problem with debuginfo, and that works now also. Here is a pre-release version of ipmiutil-2.5.4 with that fixed: http://ipmiutil.sourceforge.net/FILES/ipmiutil-2.5.4-1.src.rpm I believe that this version is clean, but let me know if you find anything. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 237336] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for X509 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=237336 --- Comment #10 from R P Herrold 2010-01-29 17:19:02 EST --- This looks like it went into EPEL some time ago ex Fedora /mnt/nfs/var/ftp/pub/mirror/redhat/rhel/epel/pub/fedora/linux/development/source/SRPMS/perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509-0.4-3.fc8.src.rpm [herr...@centos-5 perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509]$ perl-rpmbuild --rebuild perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509-0.4-3.fc8.src.rpm warning: user kojibuilder does not exist - using root warning: group kojibuilder does not exist - using root warning: user kojibuilder does not exist - using root warning: group kojibuilder does not exist - using root [herr...@centos-5 perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509]$ still builds on centos 5 what is the issue? was it orphaned out/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 547226] Review Request: pgu - pygame addon for making GUIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547226 Thomas Kowaliczek changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(louizat...@fedora ||project.org) --- Comment #7 from Thomas Kowaliczek 2010-01-29 16:55:06 EST --- Are you working on this Florent Le Coz? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 525358] Review Request: python-assets - Cache-friendly asset management via content-hash-naming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=525358 --- Comment #10 from Jason Gerard DeRose 2010-01-29 16:34:12 EST --- I'm requesting a Fedora 11 branch (currently I just have Fedora 12 and rawhide). Is a change request a new bug, or a modification to this bug? 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 553852] Review Request: pki-tps - The Dogtag PKI System Token Processing 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=553852 --- Comment #7 from Matthew Harmsen 2010-01-29 16:21:13 EST --- IMPORTANT: The following changes refer to Comment #4 which ONLY attempt to address Comment #3: # cd pki/base # svn status | grep -v ^$ | grep -v ^P | grep -v ^X | grep -v ^? M setup/pkicreate M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/so/enroll.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/seturl.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/enroll_temp.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/main.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/format.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/is_agent.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/search_temp.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/formatso.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/enroll.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/welcome.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/ajax-list.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/noaccess.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/read_temp.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/search.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/index.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/is_user.cgi M tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/read.cgi # svn commit Sendingbase/setup/pkicreate Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/so/enroll.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/ajax-list.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/enroll.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/enroll_temp.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/format.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/formatso.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/index.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/is_agent.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/is_user.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/main.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/noaccess.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/read.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/read_temp.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/search.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/search_temp.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/seturl.cgi Sendingbase/tps/forms/esc/cgi-bin/sow/welcome.cgi Transmitting file data .. Committed revision 956. # cd pki/dogtag # svn status | grep -v ^$ | grep -v ^P | grep -v ^X | grep -v ^? M setup/build_dogtag M setup/pki-setup.spec M tps/pki-tps.spec # svn commit Sendingdogtag/setup/build_dogtag Sendingdogtag/setup/pki-setup.spec Sendingdogtag/tps/pki-tps.spec Transmitting file data ... Committed revision 957. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 237336] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for X509 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=237336 --- Comment #9 from Wes Hardaker 2010-01-29 16:21:40 EST --- I've been swamped for the last week, sorry... I'd be fine with you taking on the development for EPEL if you like though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523650] Review Request: qmpdclient - A Qt4 based MPD client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523650 --- Comment #40 from Julian G 2010-01-29 16:05:18 EST --- Thanks everyone. :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523650] Review Request: qmpdclient - A Qt4 based MPD client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523650 --- Comment #39 from Fedora Update System 2010-01-29 15:39:40 EST --- qmpdclient-1.1.2-3.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/qmpdclient-1.1.2-3.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 477883] Review Request: rubygem-nokogiri - An HTML, XML, SAX, and Reader parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477883 --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 14:57:18 EST --- To CVS admins: Mark is now sponsored by me. As I have no intention to maintain packages on EPEL, I am happy with that Mark will maintain this on EPEL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 477883] Review Request: rubygem-nokogiri - An HTML, XML, SAX, and Reader parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477883 Mark Chappell 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558890] Review Request: rubygem-icalendar - A ruby implementation of the iCalendar specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558890 Mark Chappell changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 Mark Chappell changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 Mark Chappell 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 492231] Review Request: trac-watchlist-plugin - plugin for watching trac wiki pages and tickets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=492231 Jon Stanley changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(jonstan...@gmail. |fedora-cvs? |com)| --- Comment #6 from Jon Stanley 2010-01-29 14:30:57 EST --- Oops, looks like I completely forgot about this - sorry about that! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: trac-watchlist-plugin Short Description: A trac plugin for watching wiki Owners: jstanley Branches: F-11 F-12 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560071] Review Request: php-pecl-augeas - PHP bindings to the Augeas API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560071 Itamar Reis Peixoto changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ita...@ispbrasil.com.br --- Comment #2 from Itamar Reis Peixoto 2010-01-29 14:25:54 EST --- Can you post koji scratch build ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560071] Review Request: php-pecl-augeas - PHP bindings to the Augeas API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560071 Pedro Padron changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Alias||php-pecl-augeas --- Comment #1 from Pedro Padron 2010-01-29 14:21:16 EST --- Forgot to mention that I need a sponsor for this. I have submitted other 2 packages, but they were not reviewed yet. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560071] New: Review Request: php-pecl-augeas - PHP bindings to the Augeas API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-augeas - PHP bindings to the Augeas API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560071 Summary: Review Request: php-pecl-augeas - PHP bindings to the Augeas API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ppad...@w3p.com.br QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ppadron.blog.br/rpm/specs/php-pecl-augeas.spec SRPM URL: http://ppadron.blog.br/rpm/srpm/php-pecl-augeas-0.5.1-1.src.rpm Description: This package provides PHP bindings to the Augeas API. Augeas is a configuration editing tool. It parses configuration files in their native formats and transforms them into a tree. Configuration changes are made by manipulating this tree and saving it back into native config files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 555988] Review Request: rubygem-acts_as_tree - Tree structure plugin for ActiveRecord
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=555988 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 13:51:19 EST --- Some notes: * Unneeded macros - %ruby_sitelib macro is used nowhere. * Requires - rubygem(activerecord) seems to be needed for executing test program and doesn't seem to be needed on runtime (and also see below) * Test program - As this gem contains test/ directory, please add %check stage and execute some test program (like rake test) in the stage. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 548694] Review Request: python-rpmfluff - Lightweight way of building RPMs, and sabotaging them
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548694 --- Comment #13 from James Laska 2010-01-29 13:44:36 EST --- Sure enough, the md5sum's match now. Thanks! 99a3b6a2d94f3d10b041ea4a86b2974d rpmfluff-0.3.tar.bz2 99a3b6a2d94f3d10b041ea4a86b2974d /tmp/jlaska-rpm/SOURCES/rpmfluff-0.3.tar.bz2 I still seem to be seeing the python distutils error during setup.py calls. For example, during an rpmbuild ... + /usr/bin/python setup.py build grep: python-rpmfluff.spec: No such file or directory grep: python-rpmfluff.spec: No such file or directory ... + /usr/bin/python setup.py install --skip-build --root /tmp/jlaska-rpm/BUILDROOT/python-rpmfluff-0.3-4.fc12.x86_64 grep: python-rpmfluff.spec: No such file or directory grep: python-rpmfluff.spec: No such file or directory running install running install_lib It works fine when doing a 'make package' from your GIT repo since python-rpmfluff.spec is in the $PWD at the time. However, when submitting the build using koji or using `rpmbuild --rebuild python-rpmfluff-3.4.src.rpm`, it fails. I've corrected the problem locally by adding python-rpmfluff.spec to MANIFEST.in. It appears there was also a typo in the %changelog section, I've included that change in a small patch at http://pastie.org/800746. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 526876] Review Request: php-pecl-gmagick - Provides a wrapper to the GraphicsMagick 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=526876 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2010-01-29 13:20:44 EST --- php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/php-pecl-gmagick-1.0.2b1-3.fc12 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 556433] Review Request: rubygem-eventmachine - Ruby/EventMachine 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=556433 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 13:17:39 EST --- Some initial comments - Use "BR: rubygem(rake)" instead of "BR: rubygem-rake" ref: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Perl#Perl_Requires_and_Provides - Don't strip binary and create debuginfo rpm correctly. - Test fails like: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1952077 - 10 tests errors seem to be due to net connection - 1 error seems to occur occasionally - Please mark document files as %doc appropriately - At least README file, example/ docs/ directories should be marked as %doc - Also I guess tasks/ tests/ web/ directories and Rakefile can be marked as %doc - it may be preferable to split example/ docs/ tasks/ tests/ web/ directories and Rakefile into -doc subpackage (I would do so). - %geminstdir/%gemname.gemspec is not needed. gemspec file is installed under specifications directory. - Use %geminstdir macro in %files as this is defined in the spec file. - License tag should be "GPLv2 or Ruby" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 13:12:49 EST --- Now I am sponsoring you. Please set fedora-cvs flag to ? (also in -icalendar / -nokogiri review tickets) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558890] Review Request: rubygem-icalendar - A ruby implementation of the iCalendar specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558890 --- Comment #6 from Mark Chappell 2010-01-29 12:47:45 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rubygem-icalendar Short Description: A ruby implementation of the iCalendar specification Owners: tremble Branches: F-11 F-12 EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 --- Comment #9 from Mark Chappell 2010-01-29 12:47:43 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rubygem-xmpp4r Short Description: an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby Owners: tremble Branches: F-11 F-12 EL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 --- Comment #8 from Mark Chappell 2010-01-29 12:29:01 EST --- I am still seeking a sponsor. I've just requested membership of the packager group. My FAS account name is tremble, Mark -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559856] Review Request: libbsd - Library providing BSD-compatible functions for portability
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559856
--- Comment #4 from Eric Smith 2010-01-29 12:14:21 EST ---
> Actually, I feel this package is not really close to what it intends to be.
What do you mean? As far as I can tell, it's supposed to be a random
assortment of BSD library functions that tend not to be found on non-BSD
systems, and that certainly seems to be what it is.
The reason I'm packaging libbsd is that I want to package a program that uses
strlcpy, and when I asked on the devel list about the best practice for doing
that, Tom "spot" Callaway suggested using libbsd. It certainly seems like a
better approach than dumping some random implementation of strlcpy into the
package, or hacking the package to not need strlcpy. At least for this there's
a maintained upstream.
> Not really. Simply install this library's headers into a subdirectory of
> %{_includedir}
Many of them were already in %{_includedir}/bsd; I've now moved nlist.h there
as well. Given that the purpose is to provide library functions for which we
don't have a native equivalent, I don't really see the point, as it would be
much better for ported apps to use the native version, but it was certainly
easy enough to do.
Here's the updated spec etc:
Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~brouhaha/libbsd/libbsd.spec
SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~brouhaha/libbsd/libbsd-0.2.0-2.fc12.src.rpm
Koji scratch build for f12-dist:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1952087
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558890] Review Request: rubygem-icalendar - A ruby implementation of the iCalendar specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558890 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 11:57:40 EST --- This package (rubygem-icalendar) is APPROVED by mtasaka -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824
Mamoru Tasaka changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29
11:56:10 EST ---
Well,
- "Requires: ruby(rubygems)" on -doc subpackge is not needed,
because -doc subpackage has "Requires: %{name}" and %{name} has
"Requires: rubygems"
Other things are okay.
This package (rubygem-xmpp4r) is APPROVED by mtasaka
If you are still seeking for sponsors:
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 11/12, 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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 553852] Review Request: pki-tps - The Dogtag PKI System Token Processing 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=553852
Chris Weyl changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||cw...@alumni.drew.edu
--- Comment #6 from Chris Weyl 2010-01-29 11:46:17 EST
---
A couple thoughts here, bearing in mind that it's been a while since I've
reviewed a hardcore non-perl package, so I'm liable to miss something :) In
arch-specific dir/paths referenced below I'll be using the 64-bit variants, as
that's the machine I'm working on right now.
* In %build, make is called w/o options, not as "make %{?_smp_mflags}". Any
reason we can't include this? (e.g. "build breaks when run in parallel")
* It looks like you're installing some sort of web-app as well as apache
modules, but there don't appear to be any config files installed where apache
can find them.
* Given that this is a binary (that is, arch-specific) package, disabling auto
req/provides is not a good idea, as shlib / perl requires (at the least) need
to be picked up and honored. You're installing shlibs in a system path
(/usr/lib64) and a private path (/usr/lib64/httpd/modules). AutoReq/prov off
in this situation is not permitted.
* You're also packaging a bunch of perl pakcages _outside_ perl's standard
library path (aka @INC). Perl provides coming from directories outside @INC
need to be filtered out, one cannot simply "use" them w/o specifying the path.
Requires coming from directories outside of @INC _are_ valid unless they're
private reqs that are part of that same package (e.g. perl(Parse::RecDescent)
is a valid req of this package, but perl(PKI::TPS::CAInfoPanel) is not.)
Essentially: perl(PKI*) needs to be filtered from both requires and provides,
perl(*::cfg.pl) as well.
* And speaking of perl(*::cfg.pl) -- this must be flitered, in any form. This
is not a valid system-wide dependency that can be managed by rpm: no package
will ever provide it.
* You're stripping symbols out of shlibs and binaries manually, rather than
letting the debuginfo package generation process handle it. Is the automatic
process inadequate in some way? If not, why not let the automatic process do
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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 527986] Review Request: taoframework - Multimedia bindings for Mono
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527986 --- Comment #16 from Paul Lange 2010-01-29 11:44:41 EST --- Thanks for your review! Updated package with fixed double quote is here. http://palango.fedorapeople.org/tao/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 555018] Review Request: gnac - An audio converter for GNOME (first package, seeking sponsor)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=555018 Michael Schwendt changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mschwe...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #8 from Michael Schwendt 2010-01-29 11:41:43 EST --- Okay, I'll ignore that part of the review then. It's somewhat disappointing, though, to advertise support for MP3/WMA/MP4/RA and other audio formats which Fedora cannot handle. And gnac's functionality cannot be extended by installing arbitrary GStreamer audio decoder packages. It is limited to a set of file formats that is hardcoded somewhere. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 --- Comment #6 from Mark Chappell 2010-01-29 11:30:10 EST --- Oops, sorry. Should be fixed 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542036] Review Request: php-fpdf - PHP library to generate PDF files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542036 --- Comment #7 from Christof Damian 2010-01-29 11:26:31 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) > Yes - unfortunately at least three packages within Fedora already bundle fpdf > - > (pnp4nagios, moodle, and Sahana) That is a good reason. Doing a tcpdf packages after this one should be easy anyway. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 --- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 11:25:41 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) > New SRPM: > http://people.bath.ac.uk/ee0mdc/rpm/rubygem-xmpp4r/rubygem-xmpp4r-0.5-2.fc12.src.rpm gets 403 (Forbidden) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542036] Review Request: php-fpdf - PHP library to generate PDF files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542036 --- Comment #6 from David Nalley 2010-01-29 11:21:36 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) > One thing to note is that fpdf doesn't seem to be maintained anymore. Version > 1.6 is from 2008. > > TCPDF seems to be a fork or at least a compatible library which is still > maintained (last version 4.8.030 is from January 2010). See > http://www.tcpdf.org/ for more information. > > Some projects are still using fpdf, so it might be worth packaging it, but it > might be obsolete soon. Yes - unfortunately at least three packages within Fedora already bundle fpdf - (pnp4nagios, moodle, and Sahana) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559818] Review Request: drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559818 Kevin Kofler changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Kevin Kofler 2010-01-29 10:28:57 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: drumstick Short Description: C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer Owners: kkofler Branches: F-11 F-12 InitialCC: tuxbrewr (This package was renamed from aseqmm.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559818] Review Request: drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559818 --- Comment #4 from Kevin Kofler 2010-01-29 10:23:34 EST --- > 1. You might fix the incoherent version in %changelog. The guidelines for disttag usage explicitly say to omit the disttag from the changelog, and yet AFAIK it's considered best practice to put non-numeric stuff AFTER the disttag. I could use 0.2.20100107svn.fc13 instead (i.e. put the disttag first), but the question is, should I really? AFAICT this is just rpmlint not being smart enough. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559818] Review Request: drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559818 --- Comment #5 from Kevin Kofler 2010-01-29 10:25:46 EST --- Well, rdieter told me on IRC that the packaging guidelines recommend the 0.2.20100107svn.fc13 format, so I'll use that one (I'll change it after import). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559818] Review Request: drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559818
--- Comment #3 from Thomas Janssen 2010-01-29
10:17:15 EST ---
Acknowledge for the re-review request (due to the upstream name change).
OK- Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK- Spec file matches base package name.
OK- Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK- Meets Packaging Guidelines.
OK- License GPLv2+
OK- License field in spec matches
OK- License file included in package
OK- Spec in American English
OK- Spec is legible.
OK- Sources match upstream md5sum:
b8852fa0eafd6a771f8a036224bcba4f
NN- Package needs ExcludeArch
OK- BuildRequires correct
NN- Spec handles locales/find_lang
OK- Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK- Package has a correct %clean section.
OK- Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
OK- Package is code or permissible content.
OK- Doc subpackage not needed.
OK- Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
OK- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
OK- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
OK- .so files in -devel subpackage.
OK- -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
OK- .la files are removed.
OK- Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK- Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK- Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK- Package owns all the directories it creates.
XX- No rpmlint output.
[tho...@tusdell mock-test]$ rpmlint drumstick-*
drumstick.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.2.99-0.1.svn20100107
['0.2.99-0.1.fc12.20100107svn', '0.2.99-0.1.20100107svn']
drumstick-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
drumstick-examples.x86_64: W: no-documentation
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
[tho...@tusdell srpm-review-test]$ rpmlint drumstick.spec
drumstick-0.2.99-0.1.fc13.20100107svn.src.rpm
Error checking signature of drumstick-0.2.99-0.1.fc13.20100107svn.src.rpm:
drumstick-0.2.99-0.1.fc13.20100107svn.src.rpm: (SHA1) DSA sha1 md5 (GPG) NOT OK
(MISSING KEYS:GPG#1634f842)
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
SHOULD Items:
OK- Should build in mock.
OK- Should build on all supported archs
OK- Should have sane scriptlets.
OK- Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
OK- Should package latest version
NN- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)
Obsoletes and Provides are reviewed and sane.
Issues:
1. You might fix the incoherent version in %changelog.
The rest of rpmlint output can be ignored.
APPROVED
--
Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559818] Review Request: drumstick - C++/Qt4 wrapper around the ALSA library sequencer interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559818 Thomas Janssen changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|thom...@fedoraproject.org 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 237336] Review Request: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 -- Perl OpenSSL bindings for X509 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=237336 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||steve.tray...@cern.ch Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Steve Traylen 2010-01-29 09:33:27 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Owners: stevetraylen InitialCC: perl-sig I contacted the package owner over a week requesting the addition of perl-Crypt-OpenSSL-X509 to EPEL without response. I would now like to maintain this within EPEL. Steve -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559856] Review Request: libbsd - Library providing BSD-compatible functions for portability
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559856
Ralf Corsepius changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||rc040...@freenet.de
--- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius 2010-01-29 08:57:19
EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> > If you remove nlist.h, then you should require the package that provides it.
> > Are the files really compatible?
Actually, I feel this package is not really close to what it intends to be.
> This one is tricky.
Not really. Simply install this library's headers into a subdirectory of
%{_includedir}, say %{_includedir}/libbsd, instead of %{_includedir}.
This would also help avoiding such potential inclusion issues this package is
not unlike to be suffering from.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226133] Merge Review: mc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226133 Jindrich Novy changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #10 from Jindrich Novy 2010-01-29 08:48:29 EST --- There is only one Fedora-specific mc patch now with 4.7.0.1 release. So I may safely close this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 476523] Review Request: python-zope-proxy - Generic Transparent Proxies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476523
--- Comment #7 from Thomas Spura 2010-01-29
08:05:37 EST ---
I usualy include *.c and *.h in the main package, if they are below
%{python_sitelib/arch}, because it's likely, that the main package requires
this at runtime.
If other packages could/should build against these *.c and *.h, it would be
better to place them in %{_includedir} at upstream directly. Because they
didn't to that, I assume, that it's just needed internally.
Could you test, if the package also works without the installed *.c and *.h?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 556553] Review Request: apache-resource-bundles - Apache JAR Resource Bundle
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=556553
--- Comment #4 from Alexander Kurtakov 2010-01-29
07:52:26 EST ---
Review:
FIXIT: rpmlint must be run on every package. Output:
apache-resource-bundles.noarch: W: invalid-license ASL
License should be ASL 2.0
apache-resource-bundles.noarch: W: no-documentation
License.txt is shipped in all the sources jars and should be installed as %doc.
OK: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
FIXIT: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. It should be ASL 2.0
FIXIT: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc. Plese install LICENSE.txt as %doc.
OK: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
OK: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of
those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
OK: A package must own all directories that it creates.
OK: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
OK: Permissions on files must be set properly.
OK: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK: Each package must consistently use macros.
OK: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
OK: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
Please take care for the FIXIT and it 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.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558824] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r - XMPP4R is an XMPP/Jabber library for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558824 --- Comment #4 from Mark Chappell 2010-01-29 07:32:18 EST --- * Fixed the src.rpm file permissions * Replaced tabs with spaces * Removed the redundant "XMPP4R is an" from the Summary * removed the %doc lines in the -doc package * data, data/doc and data/doc/xmpp4r now have owners * Tests enabled * Removed unused macro * Replaced the "%define"s with "%global" New Spec in the same location: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ee0mdc/rpm/rubygem-xmpp4r/rubygem-xmpp4r.spec New SRPM: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ee0mdc/rpm/rubygem-xmpp4r/rubygem-xmpp4r-0.5-2.fc12.src.rpm Relevant RPM Lint output ee0mdc:vampire:~ $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-12-x86_64/result/*.rpm | grep -v yaml rubygem-xmpp4r.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch0: rubygem-xmpp4r-examples.patch rubygem-xmpp4r.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch1: rubygem-xmpp4r-tests.patch rubygem-xmpp4r-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation The patches have been applied, and the "no-documentation" is the doc package. Thank you very much for your time so far Mamoru -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559936] New: Review Request: lohit-devanagari-fonts - Open Type Font for Devanagari Script
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: lohit-devanagari-fonts - Open Type Font for Devanagari Script https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559936 Summary: Review Request: lohit-devanagari-fonts - Open Type Font for Devanagari Script Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: psatp...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- SPEC URL : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/lohit-devanagari-fonts.spec SRPM URL : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/lohit-devanagari-fonts-2.4.3-4.fc13.src.rpm please see https://www.redhat.com/archives/lohit-devel-list/2010-January/msg0.html for reason behind adding 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529198] Review Request: pynac - manipulation of symbolic expressions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529198 --- Comment #12 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 06:31:56 EST --- About Requires: pkgconfig - Note that the rule "any packages containing pkgconfig .pc file must have Requires: pkgconfig" is already removed on Fedora, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Pkgconfig_Files https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Distribution_specific_guidelines Well, actually I found that review guideline wiki page still leaves this as must item, however this is just not updated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529198] Review Request: pynac - manipulation of symbolic expressions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529198 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Thomas Spura 2010-01-29 06:15:39 EST --- Thanks for the review. New Package CVS Request === Package Name: pynac Short Description: manipulation of symbolic expressions Owners: tomspur Branches: F-12 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529198] Review Request: pynac - manipulation of symbolic expressions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529198 --- Comment #11 from Christoph Wickert 2010-01-29 06:16:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) > Not needed = no blocker at all ;) > > But requiring it now, till the guidelines hopefully change. It will only work with rpm >= 4.7.0, so the guidelines are unlikely to change any time soon. This is why it's still a MUST and therefor a blocker. Rule of thumb: Whatever is requiered for directory ownership should be listed in the spec explicitly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 549624] Review Request: rubygem-merb-slices - Merb plugin for using and creating application 'slices'
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549624 Mamoru Tasaka changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #7 from Mamoru Tasaka 2010-01-29 05:02:15 EST --- Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559856] Review Request: libbsd - Library providing BSD-compatible functions for portability
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559856
--- Comment #2 from Eric Smith 2010-01-29 05:40:54 EST ---
> you can safely drop the SOlib definitions.
OK
> Does the library *really* have hard-coded paths in the source code? If not,
> then you can drop libdir=%{_libdir} usrlibdir=%{_libdir} exec_prefix=/usr"
> from
> the make command.
Can't drop them. The make uses sed to substitute the directory paths into the
.pc file.
> Use %{_prefix} instead of /usr.
OK
> You should own the directory %{_includedir}/bsd/.
OK
> The devel package should Requires: pkgconfig, if you are going to build for
EPEL, modern Fedoras pick up the requirement automatically.
OK
> If you remove nlist.h, then you should require the package that provides it.
> Are the files really compatible?
This one is tricky.
The functionality of nlist in libbsd is intended to be identical to that in
elfutils-libelf. To at least a superficial examination, the header seems
functionally identical. However, I'm not 100% certain that the libbsd
implementation is suitable for Fedora Linux. Anyone that depends on nlist
should use the one from elfutils-libelf.
Since libbsd is just a collection of random BSD stuff, it seems likely that the
vast majority of libbsd users won't use nlist. I don't think omitting nlist
makes it appropriate to have the package depend on elfutils-libelf. Adding
that dependency will not solve the problem even for a libbsd user that does
want nlist, since they would need to add a the elfutils-libelf to their link
anyhow.
The other reason that I don't think omitting nlist from libbsd is going to be a
serious problem for anyone is that the only purpose of libbsd is to support
porting programs from BSD, and anyone doing that will have to change the
#include directives in the program being ported.
What's more of a concern is that if someone does link to both libbsd and
elfutils-libelf, they may get the wrong nlist implementation depending on the
link order. I think it's best to change the libbsd makefile to not compile or
link nlist, as well as omitting the header. Unless someone has a serious
objection, I'm going to do that tomorrow and make a new spec and SRPM available
for review.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559668] Review Request: lingot - A musical instrument tuner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559668
Thomas Spura changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Spura 2010-01-29
05:22:15 EST ---
Just a few comments for now:
- The folders in %{docdir} are all versioned. So you should move
%{docdir}/%{name} to %{docdir}%{name}-%{version}
- Please run desktop-file-validate on the desktop file.
- Does not work here out of the box:
$ lingot
Unable to open audio device /dev/dsp: No such file or directory
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559856] Review Request: libbsd - Library providing BSD-compatible functions for portability
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559856
Jussi Lehtola changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
--- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola 2010-01-29 03:32:03
EST ---
A few notes:
- Here you don't need to do anything that requires knowing the exact SOversion,
so you can safely drop the SOlib definitions. Just hard-code the version to
0.2.0 and use wildcards %{name}.so.* in %files.
- Does the library *really* have hard-coded paths in the source code? If not,
then you can drop libdir=%{_libdir} usrlibdir=%{_libdir} exec_prefix=/usr" from
the make command.
- Use %{_prefix} instead of /usr.
- If you remove nlist.h, then you should require the package that provides it.
Are the files really compatible?
- You should own the directory %{_includedir}/bsd/.
- The devel package should Requires: pkgconfig, if you are going to build for
EPEL, modern Fedoras pick up the requirement automatically.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 439630] Review Request: jogl - Java bindings for OpenGL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=439630 --- Comment #46 from Sylvestre Ledru 2010-01-29 03:13:52 EST --- OK, thanks. I just sent an email to Henrique about that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
