[Bug 568968] New: Review Request: spyder - Scientific Python Development Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: spyder - Scientific Python Development Environment https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=568968 Summary: Review Request: spyder - Scientific Python Development Environment Product: Fedora Version: 12 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: supercy...@163.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Description: Spyder (previously known as Pydee) is a free open-source Python development environment providing MATLAB-like features in a simple and light-weighted software, available for Windows XP/Vista/7, GNU/Linux and MacOS X. Spyder is part of spyderlib, a Python module based on PyQt4 and QScintilla2. See www.pythonxy.com SPEC:https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1338197/1/spyder.spec SRPM:https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1338197/1/spyder-1.0.3-1.fc12.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 566171] Review Request: libhid - A userspace USB HID acess 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=566171 --- Comment #8 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2010-02-27 06:27:14 EST --- A handcrafted Makefile that links all executables (even test programs) statically is not reason enough to build the static lib and create a -static subpackage. [Btw, in the Fedora package collection, linking statically with a library, which is available also as a shared lib, would require explicit approval from FESCo plus usage of the -static sub-package in the build dependencies.] -- Configure 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 562504] Review Request: mpi4py - Python bindings of the Message Passing Interface (MPI)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562504 --- Comment #31 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 06:29:06 EST --- mpi4py-1.2.1-1.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mpi4py-1.2.1-1.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 562504] Review Request: mpi4py - Python bindings of the Message Passing Interface (MPI)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562504 --- Comment #32 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 06:31:30 EST --- mpi4py-1.2.1-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mpi4py-1.2.1-1.fc13 -- Configure 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 495436] Review Request: perl-File-Pid - Pid File Manipulation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=495436 Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Iain Arnell iarn...@gmail.com 2010-02-27 06:37:23 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-File-Pid New Branches: EL-4 EL-5 Owners: iarnell InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 566171] Review Request: libhid - A userspace USB HID acess 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=566171
--- Comment #9 from Manuel F Martinez man...@bashlinux.com 2010-02-27
06:44:41 EST ---
Thanks Michael, great advise, I appreciate your hard work.
Well, answering in the same way:
2.
I set GPLv3+ manually because I saw on COPYING file, which originally doesn't
come from SVN, but it is there after run autogen.sh, then I realise the upstrem
claims in its website that libhid is released under GPLv2.
4.
Thanks, autoreconf -i does the work really nice.
--enable-maintainer-mode
Sorry, I left this option there when I was trying to fix an error with manpages
generation, then I forgot to remove.
rm -rf ${RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_libdir}/*.la
Removed.
sed -ie /pkgpy/s/libhid/hid/g Makefile # Use 'hid' module name
instead 'libhid'
sed -ie /pkgpy/s/libhid/hid/g swig/Makefile # Use 'hid' module name
instead 'libhid'
I had to have this becuase, previous releases were using hid as namespace for
python module, and my apps was being broken. Well, I should admit the package
is not only for my use, so I remove the lines from spec file and fixed my apps,
Sorry, my bad.
-BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
+BuildRoot: %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-)
Typo error from me, I just tried root instead XX, then restored back the
wrong string. Sorry again.
-make CFLAGS=$CFLAGS
-
+make CFLAGS=$CFLAGS
CFLAGS is no longer necessary because autoreconf is doing very well the work,
so I'm removing CFLAGS and adding %{?_smp_mflags}.
%defattr(-,root,root)
File permissions now has been set to %defattr(-,root,root,-) as defined in the
guidelines
+%ifnarch i686
%{python_sitearch}/*
+%endif
Fixed conditional as suggested:
%{python_sitelib}/*
%ifarch x86_64 ppc64 sparc64
%{python_sitearch}/*
%endif
Please, note the s390x architecture is not included, since upstream doesn't
recommend to build libhid on such arch.
At the end, I'd like to ask you, if you mind to check if the patch comment is
ok. I'm applying this patch since the upstream is building manpages with
xsltproc with the xslt templates in a location that only works on Debian, so
I'm using db2x_docbook2man in order to generate manpages safely. This is why I
have added the brief comment, as the Guidelines suggest.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
New release is available at:
Spec URL: http://repo.bashlinux.com/rpm/fedora/12/bashlinux/SPECS/libhid.spec
SRPM URL:
http://repo.bashlinux.com/rpm/fedora/12/bashlinux/SRPMS/libhid-0.2.17-3.fc12.src.rpm
Thank you for your time and patience, I'll be waiting for new comments.
Whenever you have a chance.
--
Configure 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 226099] Merge Review: linuxwacom
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226099 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org Resolution||WONTFIX AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|toms...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #1 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 07:29:15 EST --- This package is deprecated and replaced by xorg-x11-drv-wacom. See: http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/linuxwacom/ - WONTFIX -- 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 226534] Merge Review: vte
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226534
Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27
07:58:00 EST ---
Some other issues:
- there is no URL
- no parallal make
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Parallel_make
- please use INSTALL=install -p when running make install
- why do you enable-static and rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.a?
please use disable-static and rm $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/lib%{name}.a is
not needed.
- all defattr/attr are missing the last argument:
%defattr(-,root,root) vs %defattr(-,root,root,-)
- mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 170, tab: line 454)
- Prereq is deprecated
--
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 566529] Review Request: perl-Config-MVP - Multivalue-property package-oriented configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566529 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Config-MVP-0.093350-1. ||fc13 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 567733] Review Request: marave - A Simple text editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567733 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 07:59:06 EST --- marave-0.7-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update marave'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F13/FEDORA-2010-3104 -- Configure 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 566819] Review Request: suricata - IDS Engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566819 Steve Grubb sgr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #22 from Steve Grubb sgr...@redhat.com 2010-02-27 08:37:14 EST --- suricata-0.8.1-1.fc14 has been built. -- Configure 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 568968] Review Request: spyder - Scientific Python Development Environment
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=568968 --- Comment #1 from Chen Lei supercy...@163.com 2010-02-27 08:41:45 EST --- module list of python(x,y) http://download.pythonxy.com/windows/full/python.txt http://download.pythonxy.com/windows/full/other.txt http://download.pythonxy.com/windows/full/eclipse.txt -- Configure 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 566171] Review Request: libhid - A userspace USB HID acess 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=566171 --- Comment #10 from John Pitney j...@pitney.org 2010-02-27 09:13:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) A handcrafted Makefile that links all executables (even test programs) statically is not reason enough to build the static lib and create a -static subpackage. I agree, now that I understand the static lib policy. I was just assuming the person who wrote the Makefile for this device driver had some reason for compiling with -static. Maybe that choice was driven by something that isn't present on Fedora systems. -- Configure 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 562504] Review Request: mpi4py - Python bindings of the Message Passing Interface (MPI)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562504 --- Comment #34 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 09:23:17 EST --- mpi4py-1.2.1-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mpi4py-1.2.1-2.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 562504] Review Request: mpi4py - Python bindings of the Message Passing Interface (MPI)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562504 --- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 09:22:20 EST --- mpi4py-1.2.1-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F13/FEDORA-2010-3100 -- Configure 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 566171] Review Request: libhid - A userspace USB HID acess 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=566171 --- Comment #11 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2010-02-27 09:41:54 EST --- It appears to be personal preference only. A single file for each program, and no dependency on any external DSOs. Some people like to do that even if it isn't necessary. Sometimes but rarely there is a reason for static linking. E.g. just recently a tiny plugin interface library in the Package Review queue required static linking. Its implementation used C/C++ static storage, which would be shared by multiple plugins dlopen'ed by the same process. Only by linking the library statically with every plugin, each plugin gets its own independent storage. * Static Linking Considered Harmful http://people.redhat.com/drepper/no_static_linking.html * There is a small camp of people which like to link _special_ applications statically, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pertusus#On_static_library_packaging_for_numerical_and_data_processing However, that doesn't have backup from Fedora's packaging comittee. -- Configure 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 543549] Review Request: rubygem-haml - XHTML/XML templating engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=543549 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(mba...@redhat.com ||) --- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27 10:22:00 EST --- Michal, ping? (Just to be sure that I am also waiting for your another review request or your pre-review of other person's review request for sponsorship issue) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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 --- Comment #8 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27 10:24:12 EST --- (Just a note that I postpone review request until blocking bug 553898 (review request for rubygem-jeweler) gets nearly 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 547974] Review Request: ibus-skk - Japanese Simple Kana Kanji IME for ibus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547974 --- Comment #23 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27 10:26:09 EST --- Ueno-san, would you create your account on FAS and request for sponsorship? -- Configure 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 550601] Review Request: themonospot-gui-qt - Qt gui to scan multimedia files using Themonospot
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550601 --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27 10:27:08 EST --- Again 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 540617] Review Request: django-lint - lint for (python) django web-framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=540617
--- Comment #14 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2010-02-27 10:36:27 EST
---
I started to get familiar with the python review guidelines again. So here are
some minor issues:
- %{python_sitelib} is defined in Fedora 13 and newer, so please use this:
%if ! (0%{?fedora} 12 || 0%{?rhel} 5)
%{!?python_sitelib: %global python_sitelib %(%{__python} -c from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib()))}
%endif
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros
- Instead of BuildRequires: python-devel please use BuildRequires:
python2-devel
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires
- Please use %{version} in Source0: Source0:
http://chris-lamb.co.uk/releases/django-lint/django-lint-%{version}/django-lint-%{version}.tar.bz2
This makes it easier to update the spec, because then you maybe only need to
adjust the version and can use spectool -g -R to download the matching source
file
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 567713] Review Request: python-empy - A powerful and robust template system for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567713 --- Comment #2 from Filipe Rosset rosset.fil...@gmail.com 2010-02-27 11:46:40 EST --- Updated according #comment 1 (Dan Horák thanks for your formal review) Spec URL: http://filiperosset.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-empy/python-empy.spec SRPM URL: http://filiperosset.fedorapeople.org/packages/python-empy/python-empy-3.3-3.fc12.src.rpm Changes: - Remove python-devel in BuildRequires - Fix shebang on rpmlint -- Configure 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 554103] Review Request: fgrun - Graphical frontend for launching FlightGear flight simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554103 --- Comment #5 from Fabrice Bellet fabr...@bellet.info 2010-02-27 11:49:39 EST --- Created an attachment (id=396765) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=396765) replace fltk wrapper around scandir() I need this patch so fgrun properly scans flightgear scenery subdirs for airports. Does it work for you too ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ 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 #69 from James Heather j.heat...@surrey.ac.uk 2010-02-27 12:16:48 EST --- Does that not suggest that it would be better off as a single spec file that builds both gluegen and jogl? I am not sure what the motivation is for splitting into two packages if the gluegen source is needed to build both of them. James -- Configure 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 556346] Review Request: stage - A 2.5D multi-robot simulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=556346
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27
13:00:18 EST ---
Checked -3.
Some notes:
* SourceURL
- For sourceforge hosted tarball, please follow
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Sourceforge.net
* BR (BuildRequires) for mesa related packages
- For historical reason we prefer to use virtually provided dependency
to (Build)Requires like BuildRequires: libGL(U)-devel instead of
using rpm name directly.
* Requires for -devel subpackage
- Installed stage.pc contains:
---
7 Libs: -L${prefix}/lib -lstage -lfltk_images -lpng -lz -ljpeg -lfltk_gl
-lGLU -lGL -lfltk
8 Cflags: -I${prefix}/include/Stage-3.2 -I/usr/include/freetype2
-D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_THREAD_SAFE
---
This means -devel subpackage should have
Requires: fltk-devel libpng-devel libjpeg-devel libGL-devel libGLU-devel
( zlib-devel is pulled in by libpng-devel, freetype-devel is pulled in by
fltk-devel )
! BuildRequires in one place
- This is not a blocker, however it is more readable to write all
BuildRequires in one place instead of seperating them into some
subpackages.
* pkgconfig Requires
- Explicitly writing Requires: pkgconfig is no longer needed on
Fedora 11 and above.
* Macros
- Use macros correctly. /usr/share should be %{_datadir}:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/RPMMacros
* Build failure
- Your srpm fails to build on F-13:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2017917
This is because Fedora 13 changed the behavior of linker:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UnderstandingDSOLinkChange
To check F-13 linker behavior on F-12/11, you can do this by adding
-
export LDFLAGS=-Wl,--no-add-needed
-
before %cmake line.
--
Configure 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 564567] Review Request: gwaei - A Japanese dictionary for Gnome
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564567 --- Comment #10 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27 13:01:17 EST --- Any news on 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 568149] Review Request: RunSnakeRun - GUI Viewer for Python profiling runs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=568149 Ionuț Arțăriși maple...@lavabit.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||maple...@lavabit.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Ionuț Arțăriși maple...@lavabit.com 2010-02-27 13:00:36 EST --- Hello, Here's my review: $ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/RunSnakeRun-2.0.0-0.1.b4.fc12.noarch.rpm RunSnakeRun.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US cProfile - c Profile, profile, profitless RunSnakeRun.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US profiler - profile, profiles, profiled RunSnakeRun.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US sortable - portable, sort able, sort-able RunSnakeRun.noarch: W: no-documentation RunSnakeRun.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/runsnakerun/runsnake.py 0644 /usr/bin/python 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. - The license in license.txt should be included in the %doc section of %files - Please remove the shebang from /usr/lib/python2.6/site-packages/runsnakerun/runsnake.py - All GUI applications must include a desktop entry [1] - Small suggestion: there's a missing dot at the end of the %description. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_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 569038] New: Review Request: pinta - Simple painting for Gtk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pinta - Simple painting for Gtk https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569038 Summary: Review Request: pinta - Simple painting for Gtk Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sebast...@when.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sdz.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/pinta.spec SRPM URL: http://sdz.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/pinta-0.1-1.20100227git.fc12.src.rpm Koji Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2018110 Description: This package is another one intended for the Design Suite. -- Configure 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 556988] Review Request: ibus-fbterm - IBus front-end for fbterm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=556988 --- Comment #15 from Caius 'kaio' Chance ccha...@redhat.com 2010-02-27 14:06:20 EST --- Spec URL: http://kaio.fedorapeople.org/packaging/ibus-fbterm.spec SRPM URL: http://kaio.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/ibus-fbterm-0.9.1-7.fc12.src.rpm Description: IBus front-end for fbterm. -- Configure 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 565376] Review Request: qstardict - StarDict clone written in Qt4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=565376
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27
15:37:58 EST ---
From next time please change the release number every time
you modify your spec file (unless version number changes)
Some notes:
* License
- License tag should be GPLv2+ (the developer can change the
license freely even from GPLv3, if all the contributor for
the source codes agree it)
* BuildRequires
- qt-devel is pulled in by kdelibs-devel, so explicitly writing
BR: qt-devel is not needed.
- Also using vitrual dependency related BuildRequires is preferable
(i.e. BR: kdelibs4-devel is preferable)
? Enabled plugin
- Would you explain why you enable only stardict web plugins?
* Macros
- Choose %{__make} or make, not use both.
* %defattr
- Now we prefer to use %defattr(-,root,root,-)
* Build failure
- Your srpm does not build on F-13:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2018034
This is because Fedora 13 changed the behavior of linker:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/UnderstandingDSOLinkChange
To check F-13 linker behavior on F-12/11, you can do this by
'make %{?_smp_mflags} LINK=g++ -Wl,--no-add-needed' for
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 540617] Review Request: django-lint - lint for (python) django web-framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=540617
--- Comment #15 from Till Maas opensou...@till.name 2010-02-27 15:57:33 EST
---
A bigger issue: you are using/defining %{_python_sitelib} instead of
%{python_sitelib} and you are using %define instead of %global
--
Configure 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 559213] Review Request: sugar-typing-turtle - A multilingual animated touch typing trainer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559213 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 16:26:46 EST --- sugar-typing-turtle-26-2.fc12 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 12. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-typing-turtle-26-2.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 559213] Review Request: sugar-typing-turtle - A multilingual animated touch typing trainer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559213 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 16:26:52 EST --- sugar-typing-turtle-26-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-typing-turtle-26-2.fc13 -- Configure 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 559213] Review Request: sugar-typing-turtle - A multilingual animated touch typing trainer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559213 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27 16:26:57 EST --- sugar-typing-turtle-26-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sugar-typing-turtle-26-2.fc11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 559213] Review Request: sugar-typing-turtle - A multilingual animated touch typing trainer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=559213
--- Comment #7 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2010-02-27 16:31:45
EST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
[...]
Issues:
- the command to install the package should be
%{__python} setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
instead of
python ./setup.py install --prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_prefix}
We discussed this on IRC; it seems like the setup.py file has issues with this
invocation.
- remove the hidden files.
Done before importing!
These are not blockers, so the package is APPROVED.
Thanks for 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 564425] Review Request: sugar-tamtam - A suite of four music and sound related activities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564425
--- Comment #2 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2010-02-27 17:07:17
EST ---
(In reply to comment #1)
I uploaded a new version.
Spec URL: http://sdz.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/sugar-tamtam.spec
SRPM URL:
http://sdz.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/sugar-tamtam-0-0.2.20100201git.fc12.src.rpm
Issues:
- The sugar-tamtam package should be called sugar-tamtam-common because it is
not a standalone package. The srpm and spec will still be called sugar-tamtam.
I moved the common files into a common package. Rpmlint complains now about the
main package containing no binary, though.
- Due to python3 the python guidelines have changed recently. Please update
the
macro definitions acording to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Python#Macros
- You can drop python_sitelib because it is not needed here.
Both done!
- make is not verbose so compiler flags cannot be verified.
I added the V=1 parameter, so that should be good, too.
- add -p to preserve timestamps when using cp -r
Done.
- the command to install the package should be
%{__python} setup.py install -O1 --skip-build --root $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
instead of
python ./setup.py install --prefix=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_prefix}
We discussed this on IRC; setup.py seems to have issues with the other
invocation.
- Typos: organise - organize, synthesiser - synthesizer
Fixed these and a few other typos.
- backup-file-in-package: Are these files needed?
I don't think so and have removed them.
--
Configure 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 564425] Review Request: sugar-tamtam - A suite of four music and sound related activities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564425
Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27
17:41:22 EST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
I moved the common files into a common package. Rpmlint complains now about
the
main package containing no binary, though.
This is ok, the lib in %{python_sitearch}/tamtam *is* binary.
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 564425] Review Request: sugar-tamtam - A suite of four music and sound related activities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564425 Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2010-02-27 18:03:45 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sugar-tamtam Short Description: A suite of four music and sound related activities Owners: sdz Branches: F-13 F-12 F-11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 564425] Review Request: sugar-tamtam - A suite of four music and sound related activities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564425 --- Comment #5 from Sebastian Dziallas sebast...@when.com 2010-02-27 18:04:26 EST --- Thanks for the review! I'll import an updated version that doesn't build the - empty - base package, as discussed on IRC. -- Configure 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 549593] Review Request: tumbler - D-Bus service for applications to request thumbnails
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549593
Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review?, |fedora-review+
|needinfo?(sunda...@redhat.c |
|om) |
--- Comment #6 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2010-02-27
18:43:48 EST ---
OK - MUST: named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
OK - MUST: spec file name matches the base package %{name}
OK - MUST: package meets the Packaging Guidelines
OK - MUST: license file included in %doc
OK - MUST: spec is in American English
OK - MUST: spec is legible
OK - MUST: sources match the upstream source by MD5
f3f9c549ddac430904f61d80ebf7d1ac
OK - MUST: successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on x86_64
OK - MUST: no ExcludeArch.
OK - MUST: all build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
OK - MUST: handles locales properly with %find_lang
OK - MUST: calls ldconfig in %post and %postun
OK - MUST: does not bundle copies of system libraries.
OK - MUST: not designed to be relocatable
OK - MUST: owns all directories that it creates
OK - MUST: no duplicate files in the %files listing
OK - MUST: permissions on files are set properly, includes %defattr(...)
OK - MUST: package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
OK - MUST: consistently uses macros
OK - MUST: package contains code, or permissable content
N/A - MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage
OK - MUST: Files included as %doc do not affect the runtime of the application
OK - MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package
N/A - MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package
OK - MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix, then library
files that end in .so must go in a -devel package.
OK - MUST: devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned
dependency
OK - MUST: The package does not contain any .la libtool archives.
N/A - MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file
OK - MUST: package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK - MUST: all filenames valid UTF-8
SHOULD Items:
OK - SHOULD: Source package includes license text(s) as a separate file.
N/A - SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
OK - SHOULD: builds in mock.
OK - SHOULD: compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
OK - SHOULD: functions as described.
OK - SHOULD: Scriptlets are sane.
N/A - SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
OK - SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) files should be placed in a -devel pkg
OK - SHOULD: no file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or
/usr/sbin
Other items:
OK - latest stable version
OK - SourceURL valid
OK - Compiler flags ok
OK - Debuginfo complete
Issues:
- License tag should be GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ because the libs are LGPLv2+ and
only tumblerd is GPLv2+
- make is not verbose (V=1)
- $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/result/tumbler-*
tumbler.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
tumbler.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
tumbler.src:15: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 15, tab: line 1)
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Although the buildroot tag and the cleaning of buildroot are no longer
required, it cant hurt to have them. Same for Same for 'Requires: pkgconfig' in
the devel package.
Fix the first two, the rest is up to you.
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 547974] Review Request: ibus-skk - Japanese Simple Kana Kanji IME for ibus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547974 --- Comment #24 from Daiki Ueno u...@unixuser.org 2010-02-27 19:34:34 EST --- Tasaka-san, sorry for bothering you again. I created my account ueno on FAS, but I couldn't figure out how to request for sponsorship on the system. Is that triggered by applying to some group? (while I see Please do not apply to this group in the packagers group description) -- Configure 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 #70 from Henrique LonelySpooky Junior henrique...@gmail.com 2010-02-27 19:46:46 EST --- I'll probably need some help with this no-soname issue. Ideas, guys? (In reply to comment #69) Does that not suggest that it would be better off as a single spec file that builds both gluegen and jogl? I am not sure what the motivation is for splitting into two packages if the gluegen source is needed to build both of them. James Build both from the same source was my first idea, but since they are different projects, maybe, provide a separated gluegen is the best practice. -- Configure 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 547974] Review Request: ibus-skk - Japanese Simple Kana Kanji IME for ibus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547974 --- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-02-27 20:11:02 EST --- Now I am sponsoring you. Please follow Join wiki again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 569099] New: Review Request: rubygem-parseconfig - Ruby Configuration File Parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-parseconfig - Ruby Configuration File Parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569099 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-parseconfig - Ruby Configuration File Parser Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: wdier...@rackspace.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://5dollarwhitebox.org/tmp/rubygem-parseconfig.spec SRPM URL: http://5dollarwhitebox.org/tmp/rubygem-parseconfig-0.5.2-1.src.rpm Description: ParseConfig is a Ruby class written to parse standard *nix style configuration files in the format of 'param = value'. The key benefit is that your ruby scripts can use the same configuration files of most unix/linux applications. Copied this spec from rubygem-cobbler as a starting point. Did not add Requires: ruby(abi) as I don't see where that is provided in EPEL.. perhaps need to add some condition checks for elX/fcX builds? 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 561235] Review Request: phpesp - PHP-based survey web application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561235 --- Comment #6 from David Nalley da...@gnsa.us 2010-02-27 23:53:07 EST --- Per our conversation in irc: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2018829 -- Configure 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 561235] Review Request: phpesp - PHP-based survey web application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561235 --- Comment #7 from Hiemanshu Sharma hieman...@gmail.com 2010-02-28 00:04:56 EST --- The package looks good to me. Approved. - Hiemanshu -- Configure 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 561235] Review Request: phpesp - PHP-based survey web application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561235 Hiemanshu Sharma hieman...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |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 547974] Review Request: ibus-skk - Japanese Simple Kana Kanji IME for ibus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547974 Daiki Ueno u...@unixuser.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #26 from Daiki Ueno u...@unixuser.org 2010-02-28 00:36:07 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: ibus-skk Short Description: Japanese SKK input method for ibus Owners: ueno Branches: F-13 F-12 F-11 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 526855] Review Request: webacula - Web interface of a Bacula backup system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526855 Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE --- Comment #24 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@tummy.com 2010-02-28 01:03:08 EST --- This package is built and in, no need to leave this bug open. -- Configure 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 558058] Review Request: ghc-dataenc - Haskell encoding 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=558058 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kon...@tylerc.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kon...@tylerc.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 558058] Review Request: ghc-dataenc - Haskell encoding 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=558058
Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2010-02-28 02:44:24 EST ---
BAD = Please fix.
N/A = Doesn't apply to this package.
YES = Fine.
??? = I have some question(s).
- [ YES ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should
be posted in the review.
ghc-dataenc.spec: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
ghc-dataenc.spec: W: no-buildroot-tag
ghc-dataenc.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell - Harrell,
Rathskeller, Hastily
ghc-dataenc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US uuencode - encoder,
encode, Unicode
ghc-dataenc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xxencode - xx encode,
xx-encode, encoder
ghc-dataenc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US yEncoding - y
Encoding, encoding, yen coding
ghc-dataenc.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %install
ghc-dataenc.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.
Spelling warnings are ignorable; the other warnings are also ignorable, I
think we decided.
- [ YES ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
- [ YES ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name},
in the format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption on
Package Naming Guidelines.
- [ ??? ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
I'm curious, cabal2spec-diff wants it to be binlib, not lib. Any idea?
Otherwise, looks good.
- [ YES ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved
license and meet the Licensing Guidelines.
- [ YES ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match
the actual license.
- [ YES ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text
of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text
of the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
- [ YES ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
- [ YES ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. If the
reviewer is unable to read the spec file, it will be impossible to
perform a review. Fedora is not the place for entries into the
Obfuscated Code Contest (http://www.ioccc.org/).
- [ YES ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the
upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use
md5sum for this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this
package, please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
sha512sum =
e64138df9d2815af5ad7871ffb3d2b7199183b6991e40929d620b8d8de06f2e22a4104ac317bf485ee98018c25afef7125314fc037ec94de9ba0973f6f190198
- [ YES ] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into
binary rpms on at least one supported architecture.
Tested on x86_64.
- [ N/A ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or
work on an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in
the spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch needs
to have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package
does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number should
then be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line.
New packages will not have bugzilla entries during the review process,
so they should put this description in the comment until the package is
approved, then file the bugzilla entry, and replace the long explanation
with the bug number. The bug should be marked as blocking one (or more)
of the following bugs to simplify tracking such issues:
FE-ExcludeArch-x86, FE-ExcludeArch-x64, FE-ExcludeArch-ppc,
FE-ExcludeArch-ppc64
- [ YES ] MUST: 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.
- [ N/A ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done
by using the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
forbidden.
- [ N/A ] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
- [ N/A ] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager
must state this fact in the request for review, along with the
rationalization for relocation of that specific package. Without this,
use of Prefix: /usr is considered a blocker.
- [ YES ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If
it does not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a
package which does create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for
examples.
