[Bug 565830] Review Request: paktype-naskh-basic-fonts - Fonts for Arabic from PakType
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=565830 Naveen Kumar changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 580319] Review Request: gretl - Gnu Regression, Econometrics and Time-series 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=580319 --- Comment #1 from Chen Lei 2010-04-08 02:33:20 EDT --- I recommend www.dropbox.com to place specs and srpms. Using the link below will give you and me both 250 MB of bonus space. https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTEzMzgxOTc5 -- Configure 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 573932] Review Request: perl-IO-Compress - IO::Compress Perl module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573932 Marcela Mašláňová changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||555420 -- Configure 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 565830] Review Request: paktype-naskh-basic-fonts - Fonts for Arabic from PakType
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=565830 Naveen Kumar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG -- Configure 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #15 from Chen Lei 2010-04-08 01:54:48 EDT --- not valid-> not a valid See http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 Chen Lei changed: What|Removed |Added CC||supercy...@163.com --- Comment #14 from Chen Lei 2010-04-08 01:53:13 EDT --- 04012009git is not valid version number, 04012009git should add to the release field. Use 0 for version number or ask upstream for a version number. -- Configure 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 580169] Review Request: loggerhead - Web viewer for the Bazaar version control system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580169 --- Comment #3 from Terje Røsten 2010-04-08 01:51:43 EDT --- Thinking about mod_wsgi, it get it work some steps needed feels like should be done by the package itself (e.g. moving files to correct location). I might be a good idea to create logggerhead-mod_wsgi subpackage with files in correct location and add deps on mod_wsgi. Comments? -- Configure 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 573929] Review Request: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib - Low-Level Interface to zlib compression 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=573929 --- Comment #17 from Marcela Mašláňová 2010-04-08 01:17:42 EDT --- Ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/3591 -- Configure 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 580169] Review Request: loggerhead - Web viewer for the Bazaar version control system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580169
--- Comment #2 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi 2010-04-08
00:44:03 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> README.mod_wsgi seems wrong, there are no /etc/bazaar.conf in the package.
>
Fixed. Now says: /etc/loggerhead/bazaar.conf.
> In loggerhead.conf, is it right to comment out this line
>
> #Alias /bzr/static /usr/share/loggerhead/static
>
Uncommented. This was broken earlier but I fixed the root cause so it works
now.
> Is this line correct:
>
> WSGIScriptAlias /bzr /var/www/cgi-bin/loggerhead.wsgi
>
Also a good catch. Changed to /usr/bin/loggerhead.wsgi
>
> About the spec file:
>
> cp -p %{SOURCE4} %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
>
> use install command here and drop %attr in %files.
>
> mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_sysconfdir}/loggerhead/
> cp -p %{SOURCE3} %{buildroot}/%{_sysconfdir}/loggerhead/
>
> more simple and robust:
>
> install -D -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE3}
> %{buildroot}/%{_sysconfdir}/loggerhead/bazaar.conf
>
Done. Though I've noticed that you've made a point of asking people to change
cp to install several times. This is not a guideline and there are times when
it doesn't make sense:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/2005-May/msg00452.html
>
> %attr(0755,root,root) %{_bindir}/*
> %{_mandir}/man1/*
>
> Explicit please.
>
> %{python_sitelib}/bzrlib/plugins/*
>
> Ditto
Implicit is unavoidable without jumping through hoops (Every directory listed
in %files is an implicit wildcard), isn't a guideline, and doesn't have an
overwhelming benefit.
SRPM: http://toshio.fedorapeople.org/packages/loggerhead-1.17-2.fc12.src.rpm
SPEC: http://toshio.fedorapeople.org/packages/loggerhead.spec
Scratch Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2101972
* Wed Apr 07 2010 Toshio Kuratomi - 1.17-2
- Fix comments in review.
- Fix a traceback for the download and diff ui pages.
--
Configure 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 241597] Review Request: perl-HTML-Tidy - (X)HTML validation in a Perl object
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=241597 --- Comment #14 from Nathanael Noblet 2010-04-08 00:22:45 EDT --- ah yes sorry. totally meant perl-HTML-Tidy -- 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 579327] Review Request: perl-Perl-PrereqScanner - Tool to scan your Perl code for its prerequisites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579327 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Depends on||579061 --- Comment #4 from Iain Arnell 2010-04-07 23:29:18 EDT --- Thanks for the review. I've dropped the perl BR, but left PPI::Document. Built in rawhide; waiting for perl-Version-Requirements on branches. -- Configure 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 579061] Review Request: perl-Version-Requirements - Set of version requirements for a CPAN dist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579061 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||579327 -- Configure 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 579322] Review Request: perl-Log-Dispatchouli - Simple wrapper around Log::Dispatch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579322 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Depends on||579070 --- Comment #4 from Iain Arnell 2010-04-07 23:20:31 EDT --- Thanks for the review. Built in rawhide; waiting for perl-Log-Dispatch-Array on branches. -- Configure 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 579070] Review Request: perl-Log-Dispatch-Array - Log events to an array (reference)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579070 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||579322 -- Configure 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 577601] Review Request: libqxt - Qt extension 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=577601 --- Comment #1 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2010-04-07 22:55:15 EDT --- Spec URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/libqxt.spec SRPM URL: http://oget.fedorapeople.org/review/libqxt-0.6.0-0.2.20100407hg.fc12.src.rpm Changelog: - New snapshot. The previous tarball got damaged somehow. - Remove configure tests hack. Upstream fixed it upon our warning. I think there was a problem with fedorapeople.org. Anyway, I uploaded a new SRPM. Thanks to chkr for pointing this out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 579327] Review Request: perl-Perl-PrereqScanner - Tool to scan your Perl code for its prerequisites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579327 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:47:02 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 579720] Review Request: json-c - A JSON implementation in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579720 --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:47:27 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 576838] Review Request: glue-schema - LDAP schema files for the GLUE Schema
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=576838 --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:44:46 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 579171] Review Request: lxpolkit - Simple PolicyKit authentication agent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579171 --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:45:11 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 579322] Review Request: perl-Log-Dispatchouli - Simple wrapper around Log::Dispatch
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579322 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:45:31 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 573929] Review Request: perl-Compress-Raw-Zlib - Low-Level Interface to zlib compression 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=573929 --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:42:24 EDT --- You need to file a ticket with rel-eng to get it unblocked. https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/newticket -- Configure 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 574342] Review Request: rubygem-xmpp4r-simple - A simplified Jabber client 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=574342 --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:43:31 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 575822] Review Request: bacula2 - Backup client for bacula version 2 server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575822 --- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:44:17 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 574047] Review Request: mythes-ne - Nepali mythes thesaurus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=574047 --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:43:11 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 570424] Review Request: transmission-remote-cli - A console client for the Transmission BitTorrent 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=570424 --- Comment #14 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:39:12 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 571225] Review Request: petit - Log analysis tool for syslog, Apache and raw log 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=571225 --- Comment #4 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:39:41 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 573741] Review Request: RBTools - Tools for interacting with ReviewBoard
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573741 --- Comment #8 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:40:59 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 573248] Review Request: garden - An innovative old-school 2D vertical shoot-em-up
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573248 --- Comment #6 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:40:24 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:37:09 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 #26 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:27:48 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569099 --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:28:17 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 #26 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:24:46 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 531252] Review Request: lcgdm - LHC Computing Grid Data Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531252 --- Comment #26 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:22:36 EDT --- CVS done (by process-cvs-requests.py). -- Configure 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 241597] Review Request: perl-HTML-Tidy - (X)HTML validation in a Perl object
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=241597 --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:20:37 EDT --- Did you mean perl-HTML-Tidy here? -- 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 190362] Review Request: unifdef
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=190362 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #13 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:17:41 EDT --- There is already a F-13 branch. Make sure you do a 'cvs update -d' to pick up the directories. Feel free to reset the cvs flag if you need anything further. -- 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 573151] Review Request: python26 - Parallel-installable Python 2.6 for EPEL5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573151 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #26 from Kevin Fenzi 2010-04-07 22:11:45 EDT --- > Having said that, is it a problem to not have it? > Rereading http://www.rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/ArchDependencies , is there a > better way to express python-devel's dependency on python? Not that I know of. Without the isa, someone could have a mismatched i386 and x86_64 python/python-devel, but there's no clever way around that without isa that I know of. ;( All the other issues I see are solved, so this package is APPROVED. Don't forget to dead.package and get this blocked in devel after import, it should only live in the EL-5 branch. -- Configure 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 580319] New: Review Request: gretl - Gnu Regression, Econometrics and Time-series Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: gretl - Gnu Regression, Econometrics and Time-series Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580319 Summary: Review Request: gretl - Gnu Regression, Econometrics and Time-series Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: leemitchell.fed...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora # Note: I am requesting a public space on which to place my spec and SRPM. Spec URL: SRPM URL: Description: gretl is an econometrics package, including a shared library, a command-line client program and a graphical user interface. Gretl offers an intuitive user interface; it is very easy to get up and running with econometric analysis. Thanks to its association with the econometrics textbooks by Ramu Ramanathan, Jeffrey Wooldridge, James Stock and Mark Watson, the package offers many practice data files and command scripts. The upstream source is http://gretl.sourceforge.net/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 546376] Review Request: ghc-chalmers-lava2000 - Haskell chalmers-lava2000 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=546376 --- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen 2010-04-07 20:06:18 EDT --- New haskell-platform just built for f13 which might make life easier for you once it reaches the testing repo. -- Configure 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 522821] Review Request: bluetile - A modern tiling window manager with a gentle learning curve
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522821 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||DEFERRED --- Comment #13 from Jens Petersen 2010-04-07 20:02:54 EDT --- Closing this out for now - please reopen or file a new review bug when a new bluetile package is on hackage. 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 580317] New: Review Request: entangle - Tethered shooting & control of digital cameras
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: entangle - Tethered shooting & control of digital cameras https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580317 Summary: Review Request: entangle - Tethered shooting & control of digital cameras Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: berra...@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://berrange.fedorapeople.org/review/entangle/entangle.spec SRPM URL: http://berrange.fedorapeople.org/review/entangle/entangle-0.1.0-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Entangle is an application which uses GTK and libgphoto2 to provide a graphical interface for tethered photography with digital cameras. It includes control over camera shooting and configuration settings and 'hands off' shooting directly from the controlling computer -- Configure 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 578886] Review Request: likewise-open - Join to Active Directory and securely authenticate users.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578886 Scott Salley 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 575541] Review Request: xcalc - Scientific Calculator X11 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=575541 --- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System 2010-04-07 18:17:02 EDT --- xcalc-1.0.3-5.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 xcalc'. You can provide feedback for this update here: http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xcalc-1.0.3-5.el5 -- Configure 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 562330] Review Request: libnih - Lightweight application development 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=562330 Eric Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #15 from Eric Smith 2010-04-07 17:10:03 EDT --- Closing since libnih has been pushed to F-12 and F-13. -- Configure 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 574575] Review Request: log5j - Simple java logging 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=574575 --- Comment #5 from Justin Sherrill 2010-04-07 16:20:24 EDT --- I had run rpmlint, but evidently was running an older version and didn't know to run it on the src rpm as well. Now i just get: log5j.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://log5j.googlecode.com/files/log5j-1.2.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found log5j.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US printf -> print, prints, print f log5j.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings I'm not sure about the 404 error, as the file exists just fine and I think the other ones are ok. Spec URL: http://jlsherrill.fedorapeople.org/log5j/log5j.spec SRPM URL: http://jlsherrill.fedorapeople.org/log5j/log5j-1.2-1.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 542765] Review Request: libghemical - Libraries for the Ghemical chemistry 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=542765 Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil changed: What|Removed |Added CC||oget.fed...@gmail.com --- Comment #10 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil 2010-04-07 15:19:00 EDT --- (In reply to comment #8) > The upstream autoconf packaging does not seem to pickup the proper mpqc > libraries, unless we override 'make LIBS=', which overrides everything. Unless > we want to redo the whole autoconf package, overriding LIBS= seems to work. > Well, what you are doing is a workaround, not a fix. The proper fix is to modify configure.ac (and his friends) accordingly, and rerun autoreconf. This shouldn't be too hard. Just add the missing libraries using a similar scheme to the exising ones. At the end of the day, you can submit the fix upstream, so everyone, and not just Fedora users, can benefit from 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 580169] Review Request: loggerhead - Web viewer for the Bazaar version control system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580169
Terje Røsten changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||terje...@phys.ntnu.no
--- Comment #1 from Terje Røsten 2010-04-07 14:58:10
EDT ---
README.mod_wsgi seems wrong, there are no /etc/bazaar.conf in the package.
In loggerhead.conf, is it right to comment out this line
#Alias /bzr/static /usr/share/loggerhead/static
Is this line correct:
WSGIScriptAlias /bzr /var/www/cgi-bin/loggerhead.wsgi
About the spec file:
cp -p %{SOURCE4} %{buildroot}/%{_bindir}/
use install command here and drop %attr in %files.
mkdir -p %{buildroot}/%{_sysconfdir}/loggerhead/
cp -p %{SOURCE3} %{buildroot}/%{_sysconfdir}/loggerhead/
more simple and robust:
install -D -m 0644 -p %{SOURCE3}
%{buildroot}/%{_sysconfdir}/loggerhead/bazaar.conf
%attr(0755,root,root) %{_bindir}/*
%{_mandir}/man1/*
Explicit please.
%{python_sitelib}/bzrlib/plugins/*
Ditto
--
Configure 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 Neil Horman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 14:46:20 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rstp Short Description: user space rapid spanning tree daemon Owners: nhorman Branches: F-13 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #11 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 14:45:03 EDT --- not sure there will be, but fortunately this is a pretty straightforward little daemon. 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 575822] Review Request: bacula2 - Backup client for bacula version 2 server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575822 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2010-04-07 14:41:21 EDT --- Thanks! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: bacula2 Short Description: Backup client for bacula version 2 server Owners: limb Branches: F-13 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 549223] Review Request: ignuit - A memorization aiding tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549223
Martin Gieseking changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de
--- Comment #1 from Martin Gieseking 2010-04-07
14:38:48 EDT ---
Hi Fabian,
here are a couple of initial comments:
- GConf schemas files must be handled properly, see:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#GConf
- According to COPYING.extras, the PNG images are licensed under GPLv2.
This must me reflected in the License field
Since GPLv2 is not compatible with GPLv3+, I'm not sure if upstream is
allowed
to license the whole package under GPLv3+
- in the %files section, replace omf/ignuit with omf/%{name}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla 2010-04-07 14:39:43 EDT --- APPROVED. Hopefully someday there will be something to put in a URL tag. . . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 531252] Review Request: lcgdm - LHC Computing Grid Data Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531252 --- Comment #25 from Mattias Ellert 2010-04-07 14:25:59 EDT --- (In reply to comment #24) > The postgres and mysql flavors are both priority 20. > Is that on purpose, I admit I don't know what alternatives chooses > in this case? The postgres version was supposed to have lower priority (10) - it was correct for the LFC, but not for the DPM services. I bit too much cut and paste I guess. Thank you for pointing this out - I will fix 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 558849] Review Request: Jep - Java Embedded 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=558849
Guido Grazioli changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||guido.grazi...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Guido Grazioli 2010-04-07
14:05:33 EDT ---
Hi i'd like to take up the review; some preliminar notes:
* project name seems to be jepp (while Jep is the main class)
* use %global instead of %define
* pls fix indentation
* group for -javadoc is "Documentation"
* -javadoc pkg require jpackage-tools too
* if you put DSO in %{_libdir}/%{name}, shouldnt you add that dir to
ld.so.cond.d?
* man page: use jep.1.*
* use install -p to preserve timestamps
--
Configure 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #9 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 14:00:44 EDT --- New SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/rpms/rstp.spec New SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/rpms/rstp-04012009git-4.fc12.src.rpm docs added, lack of url tag commented, buildroot concern noted. -- Configure 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 575822] Review Request: bacula2 - Backup client for bacula version 2 server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575822 Neil Horman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 13:54:01 EDT --- ok, thanks. For the record, it seems that the right fix for tcpd.h should be to harp on the EPEL and Fedora maintainer to put it in the -devel pacakge consistently, but I think the solution you have is fine, given that changing file locations mid-release (for EPEL at least is real pain in the rear). ok, ACK to this package, go ahead and request CVS branch creation when you're ready. 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 575822] Review Request: bacula2 - Backup client for bacula version 2 server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575822
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|needinfo?(l...@jcomserv.net |
|) |
--- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla 2010-04-07 13:25:05 EDT ---
There is a BR for /usr/include/tcpd.h on line 34 which covers this. It's
inherited from the main Bacula RPM, which does it this way because the file is
in tcp_wrappers on some releases and tcp_wrappers-devel on others.
%{_initrddir} is an internal rpm macro. Try rpm --eval %{_initrddir} to see
for yourself. On F-12 it gives /etc/rc.d/init.d.
--
Configure 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla 2010-04-07 13:16:07 EDT --- Sorry, I forgot, you need to add LICENSE and rstplib/COPYING to doc. Removing the buildroot, clean, and the line in install are only OK if you're not building for F-12 or earlier. Keep this in mind. rpmlint also yells about the lack of a URL tag. If there's no project page, at least put a comment about this in the spec so people know why it's missing. We're nearly there. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #7 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 13:02:44 EDT --- New SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/rpms/rstp.spec New SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/rpms/rstp-04012009git-3.fc12.src.rpm Ok, added comments, removed the clean script and the rm -rf from the install section. -- Configure 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 578024] Review Request: ingres - Relational DBMS Server and 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=578024 --- Comment #4 from Jay Hankinson 2010-04-07 12:58:09 EDT --- Hi Matthias, Thanks for starting the review, your help is very much appreciated. In response to your rpmlint comments: ingres-client.i686: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/ingres/files/name 0700 This is the directory used by the Ingres name server which manages the port IDs of all the other server. For security reason, this dir must only be browseable by the ingres user ingres-client.i686: E: setuid-binary /usr/libexec/ingres/bin/ingvalidpam root 04511 This module does the authentication for incoming remove connections and needs to read /etc/passwd, hence it's set uid root. (Which I believe is allowed here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Privilege_escalation_policy) Log rotate I need to do some research on apparently I don't start ingres-server from the ingres-client package but I do stop it. Although it sounds counter intuitive, the ingres-client components also contain servers. The client and server components use the same mechanisms to start and stop and cannot really be controlled independently if both are installed. Generally speak Ingres is stopped and started as a product independent of which components are actually installed. If you need more details about this I'm happy to expand further. Will update the ldconfing and pam config files as suggested. I should note here that I've also realized I've not included most of the directories in the packaging. I have an update to resolve this and will include it with the ones mentioned above. -- Configure 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 575170] Review Request: kmymoney - Personal finance
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575170 --- Comment #10 from Rex Dieter 2010-04-07 12:00:56 EDT --- I take it back about the world-writable files... those are generated at runtime. eww. Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kmymoney/kmymoney.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kmymoney/kmymoney-3.97.2-1.fc14.src.rpm %changelog * Wed Apr 07 2010 Rex Dieter - 3.97.2-1 - kmymoney-3.97.2 - License: GPLv2 or GPLv3 - omit .directory files from packaging - -debuginfo: fix world-writable perms in generated headers -- Configure 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 576482] Review Request: ghc-deepseq - Haskell library to fully evaluate data structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=576482 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #6 from Jens Petersen 2010-04-07 12:02:47 EDT --- Imported and built for f13 and f14. -- Configure 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 576482] Review Request: ghc-deepseq - Haskell library to fully evaluate data structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=576482 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2010-04-07 12:01:04 EDT --- ghc-deepseq-1.1.0.0-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-deepseq-1.1.0.0-1.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 537983] Review Request: vpython - 3D Programming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537983 Thomas Spura changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #9 from Thomas Spura 2010-04-07 12:00:07 EDT --- $ python Python 2.6.4 (r264:75706, Apr 1 2010, 02:55:51) [GCC 4.4.3 20100226 (Red Hat 4.4.3-8)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import visual >>> from visual import * >>> sphere() >>> I'm running on F-13 and here it seems to work as expected and I also didn't note an issue on F-12, yet... I *guess* (because I don't know abrt internals), that abrt doesn't catch this segfault, because it's happening inside of python. Could you try to put the lines from above into a script and try to get a abrt crash? It that doesn't work another possibility would be: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Testcase_ABRT_python If you overwrite another existing file (like the smolt one) and execute that, abrt should catch it in any way. Hopefully that helps. ## Thanks for pining, I just noted, that upstream is a newer version ;) Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/vpython.spec SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/vpython-5.31-1.fc13.src.rpm I tied to do a koji scratch build for F-12: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=202 Unfortunately it fails, so it's likely, that you can't build this... I can't figure it out, why it doesn't built on F-12 atm. Here on F-13 anything is fine. But you could try it anyway and have a look to src/build.log, which error occures... -- Configure 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 580169] New: Review Request: loggerhead - Web viewer for the Bazaar version control system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: loggerhead - Web viewer for the Bazaar version control system https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580169 Summary: Review Request: loggerhead - Web viewer for the Bazaar version control system Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: a.bad...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://toshio.fedorapeople.org/packages/loggerhead.spec SRPM URL: http://toshio.fedorapeople.org/packages/loggerhead-1.17-1.fc12.src.rpm Description: Loggerhead is a WSGI app that provides a web interface to the Bazaar version control system. It can be used to navigate a branch history, view who changed lines in a file, look at patches, and perform searches. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2099900 -- Configure 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #6 from Jonathan Underwood 2010-04-07 11:49:34 EDT --- Another thing: you don't need to rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %install or %clean for F-13 upwards. This means it can be removed from %install, and the %clean section can be removed completely. -- Configure 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 575170] Review Request: kmymoney - Personal finance
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575170 --- Comment #9 from Rex Dieter 2010-04-07 11:42:14 EDT --- working on 3.97.2 update now, looks like shebang and world writable files are fixed in the new tarball. Marking handbooks as %doc has historically been done (and is included in rpm %find_)ang macro). Scriptlet snippet changes probably should be considered by the committee. Doing as much as possible in %posttrans instead of %post is largely a no-brainer, imo. (I'll work on writing up a proposal when I get 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #5 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 11:40:27 EDT --- ugh, crossed in midair. Gimmie a bit and I'll add those changes 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #4 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 11:39:46 EDT --- Ok, just built in koji, and didn't get any BuildRequires errors, so I think we're good there. New SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/rpms/rstp.spec New SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/rpms/rstp-04012009git-2.fc12.src.rpm I fixed up the %doc section as requested, removed the URL tag, since there is no project page, beyond the git tree, and removed the Buildroot tag to fix the macro issue (since its not required anymore, per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag) 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 556161] Review Request: sslscan - Security assessment tool for ssl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=556161 --- Comment #9 from Michal Ambroz 2010-04-07 11:29:35 EDT --- Hello Tomas, thank you for review and comments. Here should be fixed version. Spec URL: http://rebus.webz.cz/d/sslscan.spec SRPM URL: http://rebus.webz.cz/d/sslscan-1.8.2-3.fc12.src.rpm Unfortunately right now I am behind proxy so I cannot use the koji build system to test in the devel target. I have tested only on fc12. Best regards Michal Ambroz -- Configure 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 523034] Review Request: python-setuptools_trial - Setuptools plugin that makes unit tests execute with trial instead of pyunit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523034 --- Comment #4 from Ruben Kerkhof 2010-04-07 11:26:51 EDT --- Ok, upstream has added a license file at our request. SPEC: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/python-setuptools_trial.spec SRPM: http://ruben.fedorapeople.org/python-setuptools_trial-0.5.6-1.fc14.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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2010-04-07 11:18:52 EDT --- +1 to Jonathan's comments, especially #2. Good catch. Also, the mock build was good, so the BuildRequires are as well. -- Configure 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166 Jonathan Underwood changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jonathan.underw...@gmail.co ||m --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Underwood 2010-04-07 11:10:19 EDT --- Some additional items: 1/ The patch should have a comment above it detailing it's upstream status. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment 2/ It's advisable, when packaging a snapshot from an upstream VC system to include a comment in the spec file detailing how to generate the source tarball. See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL -- Configure 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 537983] Review Request: vpython - 3D Programming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537983 dr.tri...@surfeu.ch changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dr.tri...@surfeu.ch Flag||needinfo? --- Comment #8 from dr.tri...@surfeu.ch 2010-04-07 11:03:18 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5) > With boost in the F12-testing repository, the boost patch is not needed > anymore. > > Furthermore, I removed the devel package and ship the *.so file in the main > package, because without this program won't work anyway and allways needs to > be > 'Require'd. > > > > > Rpmlint is now completely clean: > $ rpmlint vpython.spec vpython-5.13-3.fc12.src.rpm noarch/* x86_64/* > 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. > > > > > Spec URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/vpython.spec > SRPM URL: http://tomspur.fedorapeople.org/review/vpython-5.13-3.fc12.src.rpm > Maybe I did the wrong thing, but I took your vpython-5.13-3.fc12.src.rpm and did this: rpmbuild --rebuild vpython-5.13-3.fc12.src.rpm then install the resulting vpython-5.13-3.fc12.i686.rpm to my system Then open a console and enter a python session: Python 2.6.2 (r262:71600, Jan 25 2010, 18:46:45) [GCC 4.4.2 20091222 (Red Hat 4.4.2-20)] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>> import visual >>> from visual import * >>> sphere() Speicherzugriffsfehler (Speicherabzug geschrieben) Speicherzugriffsfehler = SEGFAULT So I would be very happy to get this working... What to do now? Greetings -- Configure 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 575822] Review Request: bacula2 - Backup client for bacula version 2 server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575822
Neil Horman changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(l...@jcomserv.net
||)
--- Comment #1 from Neil Horman 2010-04-07 11:01:59 EDT ---
rpmlint results
[nhor...@hmsreliant Download]$ rpmlint ./bacula2-2.4.4-4.fc12.src.rpm
bacula2.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) bacula -> Dracula, backlash,
oracular
bacula2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Bacula -> Dracula,
Backlash, Oracular
bacula2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bacula -> Dracula,
backlash, oracular
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Spelling errors are prettly clearly confusion on the part of rpmlint, so waive
those.
Naming: check. follows guidelines
Spec File:
Legible, american english, Good.
Looks like you need tcp_wrappers-devel added as a BuildRequires
also, it looks like you use the macro %{__initrddir} and I don't see where
that is defined. Of course it builds fine, so I'm guessing I'm just missing
something
Initscript looks good
The BuildRoot tag isn't needed anymore, but its ignored and correct if it were
to be used, so don't worry about it
License is ok (GPLv2 with exceptions), and included as %doc
upstream sources match (4eb6155b45611018af03002d37a2ffde)
Package Builds: check on x86_64
No DSO's in package, so we're good there
No devel package
No static libraries
No double owned directories or files, check.
install does a rm -rf %buildroot, check
spec if utf-8, check
builds in mock, check (after adding tcp_wrappers-devel to Buildrequires)
subpackage client requires fully versioned common package, check
I think if you fix the tcpwrappers issue (and explain the initrddir macro to
me), I'll approve this, 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 561243] Review Request: meshlab - A system for processing and editing unstructured 3D triangular meshes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=561243 --- Comment #4 from Eric Smith 2010-04-07 10:58:48 EDT --- Thanks for the suggestions. I've updated the spec. Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~brouhaha/meshlab/meshlab.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~brouhaha/meshlab/meshlab-1.2.2-3.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 190362] Review Request: unifdef
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=190362 Eric Smith changed: What|Removed |Added CC||e...@brouhaha.com Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Eric Smith 2010-04-07 10:47:56 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: unifdef New Branches: F-13 Owners: brouhaha -- 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 193480] Review Request: sunifdef
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=193480 Eric Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? | --- Comment #12 from Eric Smith 2010-04-07 10:45:21 EDT --- Sorry, meant to attach that to the unifdef review request, not sunifdef. Please disregard. -- 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 467655] Review Request: yafaray - a raytracer for Blender.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467655
Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|kwiz...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org
Flag|fedora-review? |
--- Comment #78 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) 2010-04-07
10:36:37 EDT ---
I'm still having problem with every single hardware I am testing this package.
Either built locally or with koji. (tested x64_64)
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2099632
Hence I cannot give a + on this. That been said, it could not be a problem with
yafaray but blender, or whatever.
I could leave a chance for another reviewer/user to make this package goes in.
(So I leave review).
I will obsoletes yafray (without an a) given that the current blender version
doesn't support it anyway.
A last note, I guess usage of %if %{with snap} conditional seems too much for
such 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 570166] Review Request: rstp - user space rapid spanning tree protocol daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570166
Jon Ciesla changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||l...@jcomserv.net
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|l...@jcomserv.net
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla 2010-04-07 10:33:49 EDT ---
# MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.[1]
rstp.src: W: invalid-url URL
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shemminger/rstp.git
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
rstp.src: W: invalid-url Source0: rstp-04012009git.tar.bz2
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[l...@bamboo SPECS]$ rpmlint -i ../RPMS/i686/rstp-*
rstp.i686: W: invalid-url URL
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shemminger/rstp.git
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
rstp-debuginfo.i686: W: invalid-url URL
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shemminger/rstp.git
The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL.
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
FIX URL tag is for the website for the project. The source error is OK since
this is a git snapshot.
# MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK.
# MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
OK
# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK. Should this have an initscript, though? I don't know, I've not used this.
# MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
OK.
# MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. [3]
OK.
# MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package must be included in %doc.[4]
FIX. Also include the CHANGES_TO_RSTPLIB and TODO, and the rstplib docs, in
%doc.
# MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
OK.
# MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
OK.
# 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.
OK. Git checkout.
# MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]
OK.
# MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line. [8]
OK.
# 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.
Mock build in progress to check this.
# MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9]
OK.
# MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10]
N/A.
# MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]
OK.
# 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. [12]
OK.
# 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. [13]
OK.
# MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. [14]
OK.
# MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line. [15]
OK.
# MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16]
FIX. You use one macro style for cflags, the other for buildroot. Pick one.
https://fedor
[Bug 575822] Review Request: bacula2 - Backup client for bacula version 2 server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=575822 Neil Horman changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nhor...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|nhor...@redhat.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 566878] Review Request: python-jswebkit - A JS way to gtkwebkit core
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566878 Ankur Sinha changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) --- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha 2010-04-07 10:14:51 EDT --- > > MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the > Licensing Guidelines > > > > MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual > license. > > -- This and above : The source tar has a COPYING file containing the GPLv3 in > it. Please clarify the license? > > 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. > > > If the license is not Beerware and is GPLv3 as in COPYING, it must be included > in %doc > hi, Requesting fedora-legal to look at this once please? regards, Ankur -- Configure 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 578024] Review Request: ingres - Relational DBMS Server and 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=578024 --- Comment #3 from Matthias Runge 2010-04-07 09:57:52 EDT --- I forgot to mention, even if I could do a review, you'll still need a sponsor. -- Configure 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 526916] Review Request: orc - The Oil Runtime Compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526916
--- Comment #29 from Fabian Deutsch 2010-04-07 09:10:12
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #28)
> (In reply to comment #27)
> > (In reply to comment #26)
> > > Okay, but I then don't understand why the -devel sub-package doesn't
> > > requires
> > > -compiler.
> >
> > It does:
> > %package devel
> > ...
> > Requires: %{name}-compiler
> The spec file has the requirement indeed, but not the src.rpm
Erm. Why is this? And: How can I check this?
> ---
>
> This SPEC file is APPROVED by me ;)
>
> ---
Fantastic :) I'm looking forward to a brand new shiny schroedinger :)
--
Configure 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 556161] Review Request: sslscan - Security assessment tool for ssl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=556161 Tomas Mraz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #8 from Tomas Mraz 2010-04-07 08:41:07 EDT --- The biggest problem is that the src.rpm does not build on current rawhide. There is missing -lcrypto during linking. There are also some warnings with the new openssl but they are not critical. I have noticed also these small problems in the spec: 1. Typo 'assesment' in summary 2. Missing changelog entry for the -2 release 3. The License is GPLv3+ with exceptions not GPLv3. Please also add a comment that the exception is there for allowing linking to OpenSSL. -- Configure 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 #136 from Rahul Sundaram 2010-04-07 08:33:25 EDT --- David Halik, Pedantic correction: Same licensing is not required. Any acceptable free and open source license is ok for Fedora. Detailed list is at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main A major problem with EULA is that it breaks RPM's requirement of a non interactive installation and is in shaky grounds in a muti-user environment since a license agreement if at all one is required should be prompted post-installation on a per user basis. -- Configure 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 526916] Review Request: orc - The Oil Runtime Compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526916
Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #28 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) 2010-04-07
08:25:55 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #27)
> (In reply to comment #26)
> > Okay, but I then don't understand why the -devel sub-package doesn't
> > requires
> > -compiler.
>
> It does:
> %package devel
> ...
> Requires: %{name}-compiler
The spec file has the requirement indeed, but not the src.rpm
---
This SPEC file is APPROVED by me ;)
---
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
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 #135 from David Halik 2010-04-07 08:11:36 EDT --- @kamisamanou So what you're looking for is: 1) The EULA has to be removed. My understanding is that all Fedora packages should be covered under the same licensing and Nightingale having a separate EULA that the user must accept is not allowed. 2) Currently Songbird requires its own custom bundled xulrunner and taglib (with heavy reliance on gstreamer as well). All of these dependencies should be shifted to the system libs. I realize that there are a large amount of custom patches that don't exist upstream, but if Nightingale is to be seriously considered and work properly you should work towards a more system friendly release and less of a monolithic package. As we've seen with the last release, if the system version of gstreamer was even slightly different all hell broke loose because it was designed to be used with an internal version. Songbird has always been built as it's own universe, which might work well on Windows, but not here in an packaged environment. By the way, I'd be willing to keep this process going with Nightingale since I already have been involved in packaging Songbird for two years, but I'd like to see some commitment to these changes first before jumping back into it. Without them there's no reason to proceed. -- Configure 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 526916] Review Request: orc - The Oil Runtime Compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526916
--- Comment #27 from Fabian Deutsch 2010-04-07 08:02:14
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> Okay, but I then don't understand why the -devel sub-package doesn't requires
> -compiler.
It does:
%package devel
...
Requires: %{name}-compiler
> On the other side, the requirement of the -doc sub-package on the main is
> probably unneeded. (documentation doesn't need to be on the same computer than
> main or devel).
>
> Note: -DORC_ENABLE_UNSTABLE_API seems to be always enabled, it probably means
> packages using orc should be tested with care against API Changes and/or ABI
> incompatibility.
Ok ...
> Everything else is good, doing runtime tests now.
Yey :)
--
Configure 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 566408] Review Request: proxytunnel - A tool to tunnel a connection through an standard HTTP(S) proxy
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566408
--- Comment #5 from Nikolay Ulyanitsky 2010-04-07
07:40:07 EDT ---
Hi Martin
Thank you for your comments.
Spec diff:
@@ -1,9 +1,9 @@
Name: proxytunnel
Version:1.9.0
-Release:2%{?dist}
+Release:3%{?dist}
Summary:Tool to tunnel a connection through an standard HTTP(S) proxy
Group: Applications/Internet
-License:GPLv2
+License:GPLv2+ and BSD and MIT
URL:http://proxytunnel.sourceforge.net/
Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/proxytunnel/proxytunnel-%{version}.tgz
BuildRoot: %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
@@ -59,6 +59,9 @@
%changelog
+* Wed Apr 07 2010 Nikolay Ulyanitsky - 1.9.0-3
+- Fix the license
Spec URL: http://repo.lystor.org.ua/fedora/12/SPECS/proxytunnel.spec
SRPM URL:
http://repo.lystor.org.ua/fedora/12/SRPMS/proxytunnel-1.9.0-3.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 526916] Review Request: orc - The Oil Runtime Compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=526916 --- Comment #26 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) 2010-04-07 07:28:05 EDT --- Okay, but I then don't understand why the -devel sub-package doesn't requires -compiler. On the other side, the requirement of the -doc sub-package on the main is probably unneeded. (documentation doesn't need to be on the same computer than main or devel). Note: -DORC_ENABLE_UNSTABLE_API seems to be always enabled, it probably means packages using orc should be tested with care against API Changes and/or ABI incompatibility. Everything else is good, doing runtime tests 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 570424] Review Request: transmission-remote-cli - A console client for the Transmission BitTorrent 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=570424 Satya Komaragiri changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Satya Komaragiri 2010-04-07 07:26:00 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: transmission-remote-cli Short Description: A console client for the Transmission BitTorrent client Owners: satyak sundaram Branches: F-13 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 570424] Review Request: transmission-remote-cli - A console client for the Transmission BitTorrent 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=570424 --- Comment #12 from Satya Komaragiri 2010-04-07 07:08:53 EDT --- Thank you for the feedback :) (In reply to comment #10) > You are right, it's up to the packager, but here are some more things I'd like > to point out: > > The versioning of the package is IMO wrong. The release 0.1git... indicates > that it is a pre-release and a final version is still to come, but upstream > does no releases and uses git only for hosting. Thus the package can simply be > called 0.5.5-3 > Corrected. > On the other hand the spec lacks a comment how to regenerate the exact source > that was used. Upstream is already at 0.56 now, so there should be a comment > how to get 0.5.5. See > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control > Corrected > VCS keys would be nice too, although they are not yet ratified by FESCo. See > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Walters/Packaging_VCS_key_proposal > Added > Last but not least the requires for transmission-deamon should IMHO be > versioned since the program only supports >= 1.80 but we have older versions > in > the 'everything' repos. Corrected. The updated spec file can be found at http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/transmission-remote-cli.spec The new SRPM is at http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/transmission-remote-cli-0.5.5-4.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 570424] Review Request: transmission-remote-cli - A console client for the Transmission BitTorrent 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=570424
--- Comment #11 from Satya Komaragiri 2010-04-07
07:05:10 EDT ---
> Satya, the mentioned guideline just allows you to omit the BuildRoot-tag at
> the
> beginning of the file. This is not the same as the %{buildroot} macro or the
> $RPM_BUILD_ROOT variable. rpmlint still claims, that the 'rm -rf %{buildroot}'
> command at the beginning of the %install section is missing. It wouldn't if it
> really was obsolete. Please add it before requesting CVS access. :)
>
Corrected
>
> Thanks very much for correcting the mentioned isssues and for your patience.
> I'm sorry I was a bit stressed the last weeks and had lot of things to do at
> work, which caused my delayed answer to this issue. Except the mentioned issue
> with the %install section, your package looks good now and is APPROVED.
> Remember to add the 'rm -rf %{buildroot}' to the %install section before
> requesting the CVS access.
No problem :) Thanks a lot for reviewing!
--
Configure 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 193480] Review Request: sunifdef
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=193480 --- Comment #11 from Jonathan Underwood 2010-04-07 06:03:18 EDT --- Eric - what? -- 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 578024] Review Request: ingres - Relational DBMS Server and 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=578024 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mru...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge 2010-04-07 05:30:20 EDT --- Well, since it's a large beast, I would really appreciate help for a review. Ingres builds fine under F-12 and mock rpmlint ingres.spec ingres.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: ingres-10.0.0-20100329svn2734.tgz 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. rpmlint over compiled binaries produces: 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 102 errors, 600 warnings. Warnings are mostly non-standard-gid/uid More interesting ingres-client.i686: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/ingres/files/name 0700 ingres-client.i686: E: setuid-binary /usr/libexec/ingres/bin/ingvalidpam root 04 511 ingres-client.i686: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/libexec/ingres/bin/ingv alidpam 04511 ingres-client.i686: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/libexec/ingres/bin/ingv alidpam 04511 * logrotate script is missing * why do you start ingres-server in ingres-client package? IMHO, that's not necessary. * ingres-server.i686: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ingres-i386.conf I would mark it as conf-file and remove arch from file-name %config /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ingres.conf same for pam-message in ingres-client -- Configure 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 523540] Review Request: opentracker - BitTorrent Tracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523540 --- Comment #50 from Romain Wartel 2010-04-07 05:25:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #47) > Does opentracker start? It has to start, this is just a warning Yes, it starts properly. Except the whitelist file is not accepted by opentracker, so no torrent can be added. > You have to modify the configfile to add a whitelist or use the sysconfigfile. > Both are in /etc/ packaged. Sure - and this is done. "/foo/bar" is a generic name for our real whitelist path, which looks more like /etc/opentracker-ipv4/whitelist.txt. > Whitelist is a feature which is a wish of Matt Domsch to dominate and control > and restrict the freedom of the users. Actually we find the whitelist option pretty useful. We plan to use opentracker to share VM images over a large infrastructure, and we would like our tracker to be dedicated for this purpose only. > /foo/bar is just a fake! Just edit one of the conffiles to use the > whitelist-feature! Yes, /foo/bar is obviously used here as a generic placeholder to demonstrate the issue. We have edited the configuration files, added a whitelist (we can reference it with /etc/opentracker-ipv4/whitelist.txt if you prefer). Nevertheless, although /etc/opentracker-ipv4/whitelist.txt exists, is populated and world readable, opentracker still displays: Warning: Can't open accesslist file: /etc/opentracker-ipv4/whitelist.txt (but will try to create it later, if necessary and possible). Since the option is activated in the configuration file, but the whitelist cannot be used, no torrent can be added to the tracker. -- Configure 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 455622] Review Request: scriptaculous-js - JavaScript libraries for web user interfaces
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=455622 --- Comment #10 from Dave Malcolm 2010-04-07 05:24:55 EDT --- I'm sorry that I let this stall - I'm very busy with Python these days. I no longer have a specific use for scriptaculous-js. If someone else would like to be the maintainer of this within Fedora, that would be great. I don't realistically see myself being a good maintainer here (too many other demands on my time). Thanks Till, Satya and Pavel for your work on reviewing this, and I'm sorry to have to drop the ball on this. -- Configure 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 531252] Review Request: lcgdm - LHC Computing Grid Data Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=531252 --- Comment #24 from Steve Traylen 2010-04-07 04:59:49 EDT --- Hi had one more comment I meant to mention yesterday. The postgres and mysql flavors are both priority 20. Is that on purpose, I admit I don't know what alternatives chooses in this case? The mysql version is certainly better maintained. Steve. -- Configure 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 565251] Review Request: coan - A commandline tool for simplifying the preprocessor conditionals in source code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=565251 --- Comment #4 from Mike Kinghan 2010-04-07 05:00:21 EDT --- That's fair 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 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 #134 from Matej Cepl 2010-04-07 04:53:12 EDT --- (In reply to comment #133) > My understanding that it was primarily blocked on use of a EULA and use of > bundled libraries with patches instead of using system libraries.For > Fedora > to accept it, it needs to be stable and work with features like SELinux > properly. For package (we don't care that much about program per se in the Packaging Review, more about how it is packaged) the definitive list is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ReviewGuidelines which includes by reference https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines. What Rahul was mentioning were two biggest issues with this package (EULA and bundled libraries). Of course, Fedora expects people willing to fix bugs and non-conformance with its platform, but for example SELinux issues are not something which would break package review IMHO. Even package with SELinux problems should come in, and all issues should be filed as bugs and fixed in normal course. -- Configure 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
