[Bug 602791] Review Request: xrootd - Extended ROOT file 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=602791 Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se 2010-06-15 02:13:30 EDT --- Thank you for the review! New Package CVS Request === Package Name: xrootd Short Description: Extended ROOT file server Owners: ellert Branches: F-12 F-13 EL-4 EL-5 EL-6 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 603269] Review Request: rubygem-plist - All-purpose Property List manipulation 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=603269 --- Comment #2 from Gerd Pokorra g...@zimt.uni-siegen.de 2010-06-15 02:15:11 EDT --- old SPEC file URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/rubygem-plist.spec.1 current Spec file URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/rubygem-plist.spec current SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/rubygem-plist-3.1.0-2.fc12.src.rpm current scratch-build-URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2250832 Test output (also added as comment in the SPEC file): ... + ruby test ruby: Is a directory - test (Errno::EISDIR) ... -- Configure 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 603269] Review Request: rubygem-plist - All-purpose Property List manipulation 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=603269 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-06-15 02:20:25 EDT --- I have not checked your srpm, however: (In reply to comment #1) * %check - Doing rake test needs the attached patch. -- Configure 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 604005] New: Review Request: ledgersmb - Financial accounting program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ledgersmb - Financial accounting program https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604005 Summary: Review Request: ledgersmb - Financial accounting program Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rpan...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/misc/ledgersmb.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/misc/ledgersmb-1.2.21-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: LedgerSMB is a double-entry accounting system written in perl. LedgerSMB is a fork of sql-ledger offering better security and data integrity, and many advanced features. -- Configure 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 569671] Review Request: elliptics - Distributed hash table storage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569671 --- Comment #7 from Fabian Deutsch fabian.deut...@gmx.de 2010-06-15 03:38:24 EDT --- Hi, yes I am. I waited for upstream to change it's name, to solve the naming conflict with libdnet. As this did not happen I'm planning to add a Conflicts tag to the spec. -- Configure 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 569671] Review Request: elliptics - Distributed hash table storage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569671 --- Comment #8 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2010-06-15 03:42:23 EDT --- OK, that's fine. Thanks for the info. -- Configure 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 508351] Review Request: josm - java openstreetmap editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508351 --- Comment #53 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 03:52:41 EDT --- Bogus manual sub-package's description still exists. -- Configure 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 573910] Review Request: dcmtk - Offis DICOM Toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573910 --- Comment #6 from Per Inge Mathisen per.mathi...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 03:43:54 EDT --- Hi. Good to see this ball rolling again :) pdcmtk contains only one add-on (the new storescp placeholder fields added in r18 and r24), and only one piece of changed behaviour (r45). Concerning r45, this adds a patch that fixes problem with meta header information not being read correctly when the meta header is malformed (incorrect size). This is a recurrent problem with the GE SIGNA HDx CT scanner. You can easily and safely back out these three changes, and use the remainder, which are only isolated bug fixes. I recommend reading the full commit history - it is not long. If you want, I can roll a patch for you against plain dcmtk-3.5.4 with whatever fixes you think should be included. As regards the development (3.5.5) version, I personally think it is too much a work in progress at the moment to recommend it for production use. -- Configure 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 592672] Review Request: hct - A HDL complexity 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=592672 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ppi...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@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 602703] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser - Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response 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=602703 Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||yan...@declera.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|yan...@declera.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Yanko Kaneti yan...@declera.com 2010-06-15 04:38:24 EDT --- Source matches. License matches. Builds in mock. No crazy provides or requires. rpmlint silent other than the spelling thing mentioned. No missing docs. Owns what it should. Note: Please drop these explicit requires. Requires: perl(HTTP::Request) Requires: perl(HTTP::Response) Requires: perl(URI) The automatic perl dep generator takes care of them. APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604033] New: Review Request: openemr - Practice Management, Electronic Medical Record
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: openemr - Practice Management, Electronic Medical Record https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604033 Summary: Review Request: openemr - Practice Management, Electronic Medical Record Product: Fedora Version: 13 Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rpan...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- SPEC: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/misc/openemr.spec SRPM: http://rakesh.fedorapeople.org/misc/openemr-3.2.0-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: Open Source Practice Management, Electronic Medical Record, Prescription Writing and Medical Billing application. -- Configure 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 602703] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser - Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response 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=602703 Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||shakthim...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 05:18:37 EDT --- On Fedora 13 with Perl 5.10.1, the example in the README file emits error: syntax error at /tmp/foo.pl line 9, near while my syntax error at /tmp/foo.pl line 12, near } Execution of /tmp/foo.pl aborted due to compilation errors. Can you please check? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603295] Review Request: guava - Guava (Google Common Libraries)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603295 --- Comment #3 from Stanislav Ochotnicky socho...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 05:24:18 EDT --- I just realized one more thing you will have to do. Provide depmap for groupId: com.google.collections artifactId: google-collections. This is so that mvn-jpp runs will be able to work without modifications. -- Configure 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 602703] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser - Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response 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=602703 --- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 05:53:24 EDT --- Thanks for report. Just replace the `while' with `foreach'. https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=58404 -- Configure 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 602703] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser - Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response 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=602703 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 06:09:03 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-HTTP-Parser Short Description: Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response object Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: F-12 F-13 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 602703] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser - Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response 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=602703 --- Comment #5 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 06:12:47 EDT --- I get the following output, after changing 'while' with 'foreach': $ perl foo.pl passing 'GET / HTTP/1.1' got '-2' passing 'Host: localhost' got '-2' passing 'Connection: close' got '-2' passing '' got '0' passing '' got '-2' Can't call method as_string without a package or object reference at foo.pl line 15. Anything is required to be included for as_string to function? Can you please update the README with the changes? -- Configure 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 549296] Review Request: lshell - Python-based limited Shell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549296 --- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2010-06-15 07:13:49 EDT --- Thanks for the review Thomas. -- Configure 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 547118] Review Request: crun - Lightweight, easy to use, simpler cron-like 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=547118 --- Comment #4 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2010-06-15 07:19:28 EDT --- Any particular reason to not build this package and close 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 549296] Review Request: lshell - Python-based limited Shell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=549296 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2010-06-15 07:17:03 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: lshell Short Description: Python-based limited Shell Owners: fab Branches: F-12 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 527549] Review Request: osm2go - A simple openstreetmap editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527549 --- Comment #17 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2010-06-15 07:15:02 EDT --- According to upstream everything is GPLv3+. https://garage.maemo.org/pipermail/osm2go-users/2010-June/000266.html -- Configure 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 602703] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser - Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response 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=602703
--- Comment #6 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 07:28:38 EDT ---
Ok, the full working example is:
use HTTP::Parser;
my $parser = HTTP::Parser-new();
my @lines = ('GET / HTTP/1.1','Host: localhost','Connection: close','','');
my $result;
foreach my $line (@lines) {
$result = $parser-add($line\x0d\x0a);
print passing '$line' got '$result'\n;
}
print $parser-object-as_string();
There was missing `object' method call. Run `perldoc HTTP::Parser' for more
details. The example seems be written from scratch without testing.
I will correct it in distribution package not to mislead Fedora users.
--
Configure 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 541724] Review Request: gtk-chtheme - Gtk+ 2.0 theme preview and selection made slick
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=541724 --- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2010-06-15 07:37:01 EDT --- German, can you please open a review request and cc 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 602703] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Parser - Parse HTTP/1.1 request into HTTP::Request/Response 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=602703 --- Comment #7 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 08:01:05 EDT --- @Petr: That worked! Thanks for your prompt response! -- Configure 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 547118] Review Request: crun - Lightweight, easy to use, simpler cron-like 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=547118 Damien Durand splinu...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RELEASE_PENDING |CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE --- Comment #5 from Damien Durand splinu...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 08:27:18 EDT --- No, no, it's built... Just a mistake with the status of this review. Thank you! :-) -- Configure 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 484598] Review Request: grin - Grep-like tool for 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=484598 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pa...@hubbitus.info changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) pa...@hubbitus.info 2010-06-15 08:58:36 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: grin New Branches: EL-6 Delete Branches: EL-4 Owners: hubbitus If delete branch is impossible, just ignore it, and I ignore it also. Again sorry for the mistake. -- Configure 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 600243] Review Request: libjpeg-turbo - MMX/SSE accelerated libjpeg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600243
--- Comment #27 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 09:09:49 EDT
---
formal review here:
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing
MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
libjpeg-turbo.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libjpeg.so.62.0.0
e...@glibc_2.2.5
libjpeg-turbo-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided libjpeg-static
libjpeg-turbo-tools.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided libjpeg
Those warnings are harmless, and won't fix.
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines. [FIXME?: covers this
list and more]
[+] 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.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
md5sum checksumac8bb8b00558b077c159a2f35dc196a0
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported architecture.
[=] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[+] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro.
[+] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not just
symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in
%post and %postun.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] 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.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the macros
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[+] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items:
[+] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[=] SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
[+] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.
Issues:
1. BR: nasm should be conditional
%ifarch %{ix86} x86_64
BuildRequires: nasm
%endif
2.
It'll be better to add more files to %doc
%doc README README-turbo.txt change.log ChangeLog.txt LGPL.txt LICENSE.txt
%file devel
%doc coderules.doc jconfig.doc libjpeg.doc structure.doc wizard.doc example.c
%file tools
usage.doc
3.
Personally, I suggest you to change -tools subpackage to -utils subpackages for
two reasons:
yum list \*-utils and yum list \*-tools show we have much more utils
subpackages in repo;
Upstream and wikipedia call those programs as utilities, the word utility will
be more appropriate compared to tool.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libjpeg
Utilities
The following utility programs are available with libjpeg:
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail
[Bug 600243] Review Request: libjpeg-turbo - MMX/SSE accelerated libjpeg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600243 --- Comment #28 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 09:28:17 EDT --- Packages need fix after review, most of those packages actually don't need depend on libjpeg explicitly: repoquery --whatrequires --exactdeps libjpeg libjpeg-0:6b-46.fc12.x86_64 libjpeg-0:6b-46.fc12.i686 gallery2-jpegtran-0:2.3.1-1.fc13.noarch java-1.6.0-openjdk-1:1.6.0.0-37.b17.fc13.x86_64 gocr-0:0.48-1.fc13.x86_64 darkplaces-0:20091001-2.fc13.x86_64 libjpeg-devel-0:6b-46.fc12.x86_64 libjpeg-devel-0:6b-46.fc12.i686 renrot-0:1.1-1.fc13.2.noarch java-1.6.0-openjdk-1:1.6.0.0-39.b18.fc13.x86_64 -- Configure 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 476600] Review Request: python-ZODB3 - Zope Object Database: Object Database and Persistence
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476600 Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||robinlee.s...@gmail.com --- Comment #11 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 09:37:06 EDT --- Here some notes: * %python_sitearch is defined by default after F-13, so it's better to add a conditional according to the guideline: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros * Latest stable version is 3.9.5: http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/Z/ZODB3/ZODB3-3.9.5.tar.gz * python-ZODB3 and python-ZEO seem noarch. * A -devel package should be made for all the useful header files. * The C source files in binary packages should be removed. * Packages contain text files in the Python filesystem, consider moving the unnecessary ones to %docdir. -- Configure 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 554464] Review Request: python-pebl - Python Environment for Bayesian Learning
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554464 --- Comment #12 from Tadej Janež tadej.ja...@tadej.hicsalta.si 2010-06-15 10:01:27 EDT --- Toshio, thank you for the patch! I put a new version of the .spec file and .src.rpm to http://tadej.fedorapeople.org/. I also did a scratch build of the package in koji and the results are here: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2251550 One thing that still bothers me is how to generate the Sphinx documentation during the %build phase. I get numerous warnings of the form: /builddir/build/BUILD/pebl-1.0.2/docs/src/config.rst:60: (WARNING/2) autodoc can't import/find class 'pebl.config.StringParameter', it reported error: No module named pebl.config, please check your spelling and sys.path Which are all valid, because, for example, pebl.config.StringParameter is not in sys.path. Any ideas how to overcome 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 602574] Review Request: patchelf - a utility for patching ELF binaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602574 --- Comment #3 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2010-06-15 10:22:57 EDT --- Hi Jeremy, I just found two more things that need some attention: - The tarball contains a bundled version of elf.h. I suggest to remove it and use the one provided by glibc-headers. It should be picked up automatically if the bundled file is not present. - The tests fail for ppc/ppc64: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2251623 According to the project homepage (http://nixos.org/patchelf.html) patchelf is actually supposed to work on PowerPCs too. You should ask upstream whether this is a test-only issue or a bug in the program code. -- Configure 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 554464] Review Request: python-pebl - Python Environment for Bayesian Learning
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554464 --- Comment #13 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 10:46:05 EDT --- There's a conf.py file that configures sphinx. In that file, set sys.path to include the directory that has the pebl module in it. I think this should:: vim docs/src/conf.py import sys, os + + sys.path.insert(0, os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), '..', '..')) # If your extensions are in another directory, add it here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 540539] Review Request: gpdftext - Ebook PDF editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=540539 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #7 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2010-06-15 10:41:30 EDT --- 0.1.1 is 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 592672] Review Request: hct - A HDL complexity 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=592672
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 10:57:38 EDT ---
$ rpmlint -i hct.spec ../RPMS/noarch/hct-0.7.60-1.fc13.noarch.rpm
hct.noarch: E: useless-provides perl(HCT::Std::IO)
This package provides 2 times the same capacity. It should only provide it
once.
hct.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hct.pl
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings.
The error is because of double package HCT definition:
$ grep -Hnr 'package HCT::Std::IO' lib/
lib/HCT/Std.pm:45:package HCT::Std::IO;
lib/HCT/Std/IO.pm:19:package HCT::Std::IO;
lib/HCT/Std/IO.pm:60:package HCT::Std::IO::Handle;
This is upstream bug. Not fatal for Fedora.
Things that I'd like to see corrected:
* The homepage URL should end with slash.
* Description: Please expand the IC abbreviation to full words `integrated
circuit'. The description should be understandable even for guys who do not
want to install the package.
* The big clean-up with %{__rm} -rf `find . -name 'config*' is dangerous.
(Imagine a file name contained a white space). Use find -name 'config*' -depth
-exec rm -rf -- '{}' \+ or something like that.
* Why the hct.pl has '.pl' extension? Is it necessary? Original build system
delivers hct wrapper (if it worked). What about just hct name or symlink to
hct.pl?
The spec file looks good otherwise. Please, show me updated spec file.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 602767] Review Request: perl-MooseX-MarkAsMethods - Mark overload code symbols as methods
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602767 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 11:05:50 EDT --- ACCEPTED -- Configure 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 592672] Review Request: hct - A HDL complexity 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=592672
--- Comment #3 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 11:30:26
EDT ---
Upstream was forked into couple of new designs, and hasn't made much progress.
But, this release of the package has over 800 downloads, and is a very useful
tool. So, have chosen this release, and as of now we are upstream.
quote
The big clean-up with %{__rm} -rf `find . -name 'config*' is dangerous.
(Imagine a file name contained a white space). Use find -name 'config*' -depth
-exec rm -rf -- '{}' \+ or something like that.
/quote
Sorry, I didn't understand the difference. In both cases, we still use
'config*' within quotes. Should I change each removal to use find -name
'config*' -exec rm -rf -- '{}' \+ ?
quote
* Why the hct.pl has '.pl' extension? Is it necessary? Original build system
delivers hct wrapper (if it worked). What about just hct name or symlink to
hct.pl?
/quote
The original wrapper has hard-coded the path as
#!/bin/sh
/Users/smaurer/Downloads/0.7.60/hct.pl $@
Since, we are packaging, we only need the hct.pl file. Since, it is a Perl
script, it has the .pl extension, and I thought it was ok to have it, and thus
haven't changed it. Do you want me to rename the file to simply hct?
--
Configure 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 501101] Review Request: emacs-color-theme - elisp mode to customize emacs look and feel
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=501101 Arun SAG saga...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Arun SAG saga...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 11:51:07 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name:emacs-color-theme Short Description: Color themes for Emacs Owners: sagarun Branches: F12 (I need to push this package for F12, Kindly create a F12 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 603860] Add package: iwl6050-firmware - Firmware for Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 6050 Series Adapters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603860 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-06-15 11:57:16 EDT --- iwl6050-firmware-9.201.4.1-2.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603859] Add package: iwl6050-firmware - Firmware for Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 6050 Series Adapters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603859 --- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-06-15 11:57:44 EDT --- iwl6050-firmware-9.201.4.1-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603860] Add package: iwl6050-firmware - Firmware for Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 6050 Series Adapters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603860 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||iwl6050-firmware-9.201.4.1- ||2.fc12 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603859] Add package: iwl6050-firmware - Firmware for Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 6050 Series Adapters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603859 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||iwl6050-firmware-9.201.4.1- ||2.fc13 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590832] Review Request: iapetal - A 2D space rescue game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590832 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-06-15 12:02:44 EDT --- iapetal-1.0-3.fc12 has been pushed to the Fedora 12 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590832] Review Request: iapetal - A 2D space rescue game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590832 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||iapetal-1.0-3.fc12 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 602348] Review Request: rubygem-net-ssh - A Ruby ssh 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=602348 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-06-15 12:05:30 EDT --- rubygem-net-ssh-2.0.23-5.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 602356] Review Request: gst123 - Command line multimedia player based on gstreamer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602356 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||gst123-0.1.0-3.fc13 Resolution||ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 602348] Review Request: rubygem-net-ssh - A Ruby ssh 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=602348 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||rubygem-net-ssh-2.0.23-5.fc ||13 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 602356] Review Request: gst123 - Command line multimedia player based on gstreamer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602356 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-06-15 12:06:05 EDT --- gst123-0.1.0-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590832] Review Request: iapetal - A 2D space rescue game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590832 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-06-15 12:07:15 EDT --- iapetal-1.0-3.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590832] Review Request: iapetal - A 2D space rescue game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590832 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|iapetal-1.0-3.fc12 |iapetal-1.0-3.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 602767] Review Request: perl-MooseX-MarkAsMethods - Mark overload code symbols as methods
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=602767 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 12:11:41 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: perl-MooseX-MarkAsMethods Short Description: Mark overload code symbols as methods Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: F-13 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 564518] Review Request: monodevelop-python - Python bindings for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564518
--- Comment #2 from Ian Weller i...@ianweller.org 2010-06-15 12:24:43 EDT ---
It should be noted that the previous review is an unofficial review as part of
Nathaniel's sponsorship process. Here are some comments for him as well as the
packager.
(In reply to comment #1)
[ FAIL ] BuildRequires are proper.
One dep per line is preferred.
This really doesn't matter.
[ FAIL ] rpmlint is silent.
monodevelop-python.src:50: E: files-attr-not-set
monodevelop-python.src:10: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 4,
tab: line 10)
monodevelop-python.x86_64: E: no-binary
monodevelop-python.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
monodevelop-python.x86_64: W: no-documentation
monodevelop-python-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
Put %defattr(-,root,root,-) under %files devel
Include LICENSE in both packages
Fix whitespace
E: no-binary can probably be ignored.
This usually means that the package should be marked as noarch. Unless there's
a fairly good reason that's not the case...
[ FAIL ] owns the directories it creates.
You should probably do:
%dir %{_libdir}/monodevelop/AddIns/PyBinding
If you drop %dir it'll own everything recursively, so you can drop the contents
of that folder 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 542292] Review Request: mintmenu - gnome-panel menu from LinuxMint
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542292 Nathaniel McCallum nathan...@natemccallum.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||i...@ianweller.org, ||nathan...@natemccallum.com --- Comment #26 from Nathaniel McCallum nathan...@natemccallum.com 2010-06-15 12:24:40 EDT --- This package has an unclear license. The only license mentioned is in debian/copyright. Each file should contain an appropriate license header. Additionally, the root of the source tree should contain a COPYING or LICENSE file with the full text of the license. I doubt Fedora can package this until a proper license is ascertained. -- Configure 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 604227] Review Request: gnome-screensaver-iv-scr-en-ru - GNOME Screensaver Slideshow of English irregular verbs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604227 Serguei Shimansky englishex...@yandex.ru changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://shimansky.biz/pages/ ||products_sourceforge_iv-scr ||-en-ru.html -- Configure 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 564518] Review Request: monodevelop-python - Python bindings for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=564518
--- Comment #3 from Nathaniel McCallum nathan...@natemccallum.com 2010-06-15
12:45:30 EDT ---
the E: no-binary error is occurring because of the way Fedora packages mono
stuff. ie Fedora uses arch specific %{_libdir} even though the files are not
arch specific. This is a long-time complaint about Fedora's mono packages
coming from the mono devs.
If Fedora decided not to use arch-specific libdir, then the packages could be
marked as noarch and this error would disappear.
--
Configure 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 588474] Review Request: rubygem-rubyzip - zipfile support in Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588474 --- Comment #18 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-06-15 12:48:21 EDT --- Adam, would you have some time for your review requests? -- Configure 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 570111] Review Request: rubygem-right_http_connection - RightScale's HTTP/S 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=570111 Bug 570111 depends on bug 570457, which changed state. Bug 570457 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-right_rackspace - Interface classes for Rackspace https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570457 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Resolution||NOTABUG Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure 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 592672] Review Request: hct - A HDL complexity 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=592672
--- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 12:58:40 EDT ---
Sorry, I didn't understand the difference.
Problem is not with 'config*'. Problem is with shell substitution (the
back-ticks).
Lets have code: rm -rf `command`
If command expands to 'filename', resulting command will be:
'rm' '-rf' 'filename'
If command expands to 'file name', resulting command will be:
'rm' '-rf' 'file' 'name'.
And this is not something we wanted. You can have dangerous file names like
'/tmp/ /home' that ticks your script to remove '/tmp' and '/home' directories
instead of 'home' directory under ' ' directory under '/tmp'.
Should I change each removal to use find -name 'config*' -exec rm -rf --
'{}' \+ ?
You can use all the logical ORs, but you should pass the file names to 'rm'
arguments using find utility that does not break strings on white spaces.
Original code:
%{__rm} -rf `find . \( -name 'config*' -o \
-name 'windows' -o \
-name 'Misc' -o \
-name 'Pod' -o \
-name '.svn' -o \
-name '*.svn' \)`
New code:
find . -depth \( -name 'config*' -o \
-name 'windows' -o \
-name 'Misc' -o \
-name 'Pod' -o \
-name '.svn' -o \
-name '*.svn' \) \
-exec %{__rm} -rf -- '{}' +
I think the plus symbol does not need to be escaped. Notice: I did not try the
code.
Just for completeness:
* The '-depth' argument forces find to order file names from leaf to root of
directory tree. This is good not to get warning about removal of files from
already removed directories.
* The '--' argument of 'rm' delimits 'rm' options and file name arguments.
This is good not to confuse 'rm' if a file name starts with a hyphen character.
* The '{}' string is substituted by 'find' with found file names.
* The '+' character marks end of '-exec' statement of find. In addition, it
means to pass to one 'rm' command as much file names as possible. It avoids
executing rm for each file name. (If you wanted to run 'rm' for each file name
separately, use ';'. Do not forget to escape it because semicolon is special
shell token.)
Do you want me to rename the file to simply hct?
Exactly. If there are no other tools that expect 'hct.pl', the extension in
UN*X word will be useless and make users to type more. (E.g. 'yum' is a python
script and does not have '.py' extensions.)
Actually we need to provide extensionless name because upstream (even dead
state) intends so and users used for HCT from other distribution will expect it
in Fedora too. In other words, we should not divert from upstream.
--
Configure 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 604227] Review Request: gnome-screensaver-iv-scr-en-ru - GNOME Screensaver Slideshow of English irregular verbs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604227 Serguei Shimansky englishex...@yandex.ru changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: main |Review Request: |package name here - short |gnome-screensaver-iv-scr-en |summary here |-ru - GNOME Screensaver ||Slideshow of English ||irregular verbs -- Configure 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 570457] Review Request: rubygem-right_rackspace - Interface classes for Rackspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570457 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Flag|needinfo?(mfoj...@redhat.co | |m) | --- Comment #16 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-06-15 12:34:47 EDT --- Once closing. If someone wants to import this package into Fedora, please file a new review request and mark this one as a duplicate of the new one, thank you! -- Configure 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 604227] New: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604227 Summary: Review Request: main package name here - short summary here Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: englishex...@yandex.ru QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://pub.shimansky.biz/rpm/SPECS/gnome-screensaver-iv-scr-en-ru.spec SRPM URL: http://pub.shimansky.biz/rpm/SRPMS/gnome-screensaver-iv-scr-en-ru-0.1-1.src.rpm Description: GNOME Screensaver Slideshow of English irregular verbs -- Configure 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 555059] Review Request: clamsmtp - 1.10-1
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=555059 --- Comment #25 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-06-15 12:35:53 EDT --- Nathanael, would you interested in importing this package into Fedora? -- Configure 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 603269] Review Request: rubygem-plist - All-purpose Property List manipulation 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=603269 --- Comment #4 from Gerd Pokorra g...@zimt.uni-siegen.de 2010-06-15 14:07:38 EDT --- The tests finishes successful. old SPEC file URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/rubygem-plist.spec.2 current Spec file URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/rubygem-plist.spec current SRPM URL: ftp://ftp.uni-siegen.de/pub/review/rubygem-plist-3.1.0-3.fc12.src.rpm current scratch-build-URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2252136 -- Configure 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 527549] Review Request: osm2go - A simple openstreetmap editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=527549 --- Comment #18 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2010-06-15 14:10:39 EDT --- Thanks for clarifying the license issue. Please update the package with the latest upstream tarball. Something seems to have changed in version 0.8.3: $ md5sum osm2go_0.8.3-maemo2.tar.gz* 058c9dd98dd1cca8fdc7b7a14f817a4d osm2go_0.8.3-maemo2.tar.gz 13f7fa4d89de2ac72d4ad876c6e59447 osm2go_0.8.3-maemo2.tar.gz.upstream -- Configure 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 578480] Review Request: spectrum - XMPP transport/gateway
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=578480
--- Comment #38 from Michal Schmidt mschm...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 14:52:10
EDT ---
Formal review of spectrum-0.3-0.7.git20100614:
Summary
---
Do not forget to maintain changelogs.
Fix Requires (add some for %preun, remove some for %pre).
Use %global instead of %define.
Preserve timestamps where possible.
Add BuildRequires: python2-devel
Details
---
MUST items from the Review Guidelines:
OK rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
OK The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
OK The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
OK The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines.
OK The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK 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.
OK The spec file must be written in American English.
OK The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. 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 The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
TODO 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.
OK All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging
Guidelines; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply
common sense.
N/A The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly
forbidden.
N/A 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.
OK Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
N/A 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.
OK 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.
OK A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
OK Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must
include a %defattr(...) line.
OK Each package must consistently use macros.
OK The package must contain code, or permissable content.
N/A Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
(The definition of large is left up to the packager's best
judgement, but is not restricted to size. Large can refer to
either size or quantity).
OK If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the
program must run properly if it is not present.
N/A Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A If a package contains library files with a suffix
(e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without
suffix) must go in a -devel package.
N/A In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
OK Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.
N/A Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section. If you feel that your
packaged GUI application does not need a .desktop file, you must put
a comment in the spec file with your explanation.
OK Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages. The rule of thumb
[Bug 580681] Review Request: libdshconfig - Configuration file parser library for dsh
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=580681
Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de
--- Comment #1 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2010-06-15
15:35:46 EDT ---
Hi Damien,
the package looks almost fine to me. Just two suggestions:
- The tarball contains a couple of tests which should be executed in a %check
section (with make check).
- be more specific in the %files sections:
%{_includedir}/* = %{_includedir}/%{name}.h
%{_libdir}/*.so.* = %{_libdir}/%{name}.so.*
%{_libdir}/*.so= %{_libdir}/%{name}.so
--
Configure 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 538557] Review Request: gnome-screensaver-londonpictures - GNOME Screensaver Slideshow of London
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=538557 Serguei Shimansky englishex...@yandex.ru changed: What|Removed |Added URL|http://englishextra.org/abo |http://shimansky.biz/pages/ |ut/gnome-screensaver-london |products_sourceforge_london |pictures/ |pictures.html -- Configure 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 538557] Review Request: gnome-screensaver-londonpictures - GNOME Screensaver Slideshow of London
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=538557 --- Comment #9 from Serguei Shimansky englishex...@yandex.ru 2010-06-15 15:45:04 EDT --- (In reply to comment #0) Spec URL: http://englishextra.org/pub/rpm/SPECS/gnome-screensaver-londonpictures.spec SRPM URL: http://englishextra.org/pub/rpm/SOURCES/gnome-screensaver-londonpictures-0.1.tar.bz2 Description: gnome-screensaver-londonpictures is an addon screen saver for GNOME Screensaver that provides a slideshow of freely distributable frog pictures. Requires: gnome-screensaver URLs have changed: Spec URL: http://pub.shimansky.biz/rpm/SPECS/gnome-screensaver-londonpictures.spec SRPM URL: http://pub.shimansky.biz/rpm/SOURCES/gnome-screensaver-londonpictures-0.1.tar.bz2 Description: gnome-screensaver-londonpictures is an addon screen saver for GNOME Screensaver that provides a slideshow of freely distributable frog pictures. Requires: gnome-screensaver -- Configure 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 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841 --- Comment #35 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2010-06-15 15:41:44 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) New Package CVS Request === Package Name: wicd Short Description: Wireless and wired network connection manager Owners: dcantrel Branches: F-13 EL-6 InitialCC: Is there any reason why you can't include the F-12 branch? (it isn't EOL for another 6 months.) -- Configure 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 547655] Review Request: perl-Module-Install-RTx - RT extension installer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547655 --- Comment #10 from Xavier Bachelot xav...@bachelot.org 2010-06-15 16:20:09 EDT --- Hi Ralf, it seems it dropped off your radar again. I'd be grateful if you can review this package at your convenience. Thanks in advance. -- Configure 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 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841 --- Comment #36 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 16:33:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #35) (In reply to comment #32) New Package CVS Request === Package Name: wicd Short Description: Wireless and wired network connection manager Owners: dcantrel Branches: F-13 EL-6 InitialCC: Is there any reason why you can't include the F-12 branch? (it isn't EOL for another 6 months.) No reason, just forgot to include it in the list. -- Configure 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 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841 --- Comment #37 from David Cantrell dcantr...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 16:33:45 EDT --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: wicd Short Description: Wireless and wired network connection manager Owners: dcantrel Branches: F-12 F-13 EL-6 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 598688] Review Request: archivemount - FUSE based filesystem for mounting compressed archives
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598688 --- Comment #4 from Niels de Vos nde...@redhat.com 2010-06-15 16:35:21 EDT --- Thanks Mark and Randall, I guess the should be licensed as LGPLv2+ according to the included COPYING file and the man-page. In the header of archivemount.c following is written: This program can be distributed under the terms of the GNU GPL. See the file COPYING. This only mentions the GPL itself, but redirects to the COPYING file. I left the buildroot in as I would like to see this package in EPEL one day too. Submitting/maintaining it or EPEL will be my next step after the inclusion in Fedora. I don't know where the archivemount-debuginfo.i686: E: debuginfo-without-sources error comes from. I don't have this on my system. Hmmm... I have updated the .spec and created a new src.rpm with the following changes: %changelog * Tue Jun 15 2010 Niels de Vos nde...@redhat.com 0.6.0-2 - fix license to GNU Library General Public v2 or newer - remove packaged autoconf/automake cache files * Mon Jun 01 2010 Niels de Vos nde...@redhat.com 0.6.0-1 - Initial package The result of rpmlint is this: $ rpmlint archivemount.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint archivemount-0.6.0-2.fc13.src.rpm archivemount.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) filesystem - file system, file-system, systematic archivemount.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libarchive - lib archive, lib-archive, archive archivemount.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gz - g, z, gs archivemount.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US bz - bx, b, z archivemount.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US filesystem - file system, file-system, systematic 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. (imho filesystem is correctly written, so is libarchive, gz and bz) The new files can be found here: - http://www.nixpanic.net/software/packages/archivemount -- Configure 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 604331] New: Review Request: redshift - Adjusts the color temperature of your screen according to time of day
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: redshift - Adjusts the color temperature of your screen according to time of day https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604331 Summary: Review Request: redshift - Adjusts the color temperature of your screen according to time of day Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: miloskomarce...@netscape.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://kmilos.fedorapeople.org/redshift.spec SRPM URL: http://kmilos.fedorapeople.org/redshift-1.3-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: Redshift adjusts the color temperature of your screen according to your surroundings. This may help your eyes hurt less if you are working in front of the screen at night. The color temperature is set according to the position of the sun. A different color temperature is set during night and daytime. During twilight and early morning, the color temperature transitions smoothly from night to daytime temperature to allow your eyes to slowly adapt. This produces both a console base program package and GTK status icon integration package. This is my first Fedora package, so I will 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 593841] Review Request: wicd - Wireless and wired network connection manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593841
Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|leigh123li...@googlemail.co
||m
--- Comment #38 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2010-06-15
16:43:09 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #34)
Is it acceptable to merge wicd-common into wicd package until rpm allow noarch
package to have arch specfic subpackages?
AFAIK this is a limitation of the buildsys but not of rpm itself.
Wicd is designed as a non-multiarch
package, making it noarch won't save space for both repos and end users
currently.
I know, hence my suggestion: SRPM is wicd and builds into
- wicd-pm-utils (base-package, arch)
- wicd-common (noarch, the name wicd-common was chosen to indicate it is not
standalone and because it must not be wicd to not become the base-package)
- wicd-curses (noarch)
- wicd-gtk (noarch)
- wicd-gtk will get a Provides: %{name} = %{version} so that yum install
wicd works.
--
Configure 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 585518] Review Request: gtranslator - Gettext po file editor 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=585518 Benjamín Valero Espinosa benjaval...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||benjaval...@gmail.com --- Comment #15 from Benjamín Valero Espinosa benjaval...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 16:53:35 EDT --- -- Fedora Bugzappers volunteer triage team https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604438] New: Review Request: rubygem-scaffold - Scaffold is a templating tool for Puppet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-scaffold - Scaffold is a templating tool for Puppet https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604438 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-scaffold - Scaffold is a templating tool for Puppet Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mastah...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://stahnma.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-scaffold.spec SRPM URL: http://stahnma.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-scaffold-0.0.3-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Scaffold allows you to create basic Puppet configuration, modules, nodes, classes, functions and types. -- Configure 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 604331] Review Request: redshift - Adjusts the color temperature of your screen according to time of day
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604331 Thomas Spura toms...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||toms...@fedoraproject.org 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 476600] Review Request: python-ZODB3 - Zope Object Database: Object Database and Persistence
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476600 Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG --- Comment #12 from Conrad Meyer kon...@tylerc.org 2010-06-15 19:27:48 EDT --- No need to continue this review, I've lost interest in getting SAGE packaged for Fedora (and don't have any other interest in this package). Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 555059] Review Request: clamsmtp - 1.10-1
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=555059 --- Comment #27 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-06-15 21:08:21 EDT --- You can base on the srpm you want to use (i.e. either will do). However anyway to make it clear, please post the URLs of the spec file and srpm to show which ones are to be reviewed (if you want, open a new review request and mark this one as a duplicate, and I prefer this way). -- Configure 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 570017] Review Request: k4dirstat - KDE4 version of kdirstat
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570017
Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #8 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2010-06-15 21:25:56 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #6)
* Tue Jun 8 2010 laurent.rineau__fed...@normalesup.org -
0-0.6.20100304gitec01dd42
Sorry for picking on the changelog format so much, but it's supposed to be
* date name email - version
You are missing the name.
- Patch0 for F-13: link explicitly with zlib.
Did you submit the patch for upstream inclusion too?
I prefer not to use globbing to much, to avoid surprises when I update the
spec
file with a new upstream version. Is it required by the guidelines to minimize
the size of %file?
Certainly not, it's up to you to use globbing if you think it makes your life
easier.
Anyway, %{_kde4_docdir}/HTML/en/k4dirstat/ must be owned, and my previous
%file
did not own it.
{_kde4_appsdir}/k4dirstat/ isn't owned either.
I have added such a comment. Strangely, the md5sum of the tarball has changed,
but not its content. Maybe I used non-default compression level for gzip in
March.
As long as there is a way to regenerate tarball's content, it's all good.
--
Configure 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 600243] Review Request: libjpeg-turbo - MMX/SSE accelerated libjpeg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600243
--- Comment #29 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2010-06-15 21:36:13 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #28)
Packages need fix after review, most of those packages actually don't need
depend on libjpeg explicitly:
To fix upgrade path for those packages I'd suggest to add Provides: libjpeg =
%{version}-%{release}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 570017] Review Request: k4dirstat - KDE4 version of kdirstat
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570017 --- Comment #9 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2010-06-15 21:54:05 EDT --- How did you determine this is GPLv2? The source files say either: License: GPL - See file COPYING for details. or License: LGPL - See file COPYING.LIB for details. According to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing , it should be GPL+ if the sources or the accompanying documentation doesn't specify a version. I'd suggest to ask the upstream author for clarification and suggest him to use proper GPL/LGPL header in every source file, as explained in http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.html#SEC4 -- Configure 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 570017] Review Request: k4dirstat - KDE4 version of kdirstat
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=570017 --- Comment #10 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2010-06-15 22:00:22 EDT --- Version:0 Why 0? In http://grumpypenguin.org/index.php?/archives/3-KDirStat-coming-to-KDE4.html, the author comments As you can see in the about dialog, it currently is set at version 2.7.0 /.../ Also, in main.cpp there's a line: static const char version[] = 2.7.0; -- Configure 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 600243] Review Request: libjpeg-turbo - MMX/SSE accelerated libjpeg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=600243
--- Comment #30 from Chen Lei supercyp...@gmail.com 2010-06-15 22:17:01 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #29)
(In reply to comment #28)
Packages need fix after review, most of those packages actually don't need
depend on libjpeg explicitly:
To fix upgrade path for those packages I'd suggest to add Provides: libjpeg =
%{version}-%{release}
It will break some packages silently, some of those packages depend on libjpeg
utilities which now packages as a subpackage. Among those packages, only
java-1.6.0-openjdk should fix intermediatly.
--
Configure 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 577152] Review Request: apiextractor - Library headers parser to extract API information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577152 --- Comment #6 from Kalev Lember ka...@smartlink.ee 2010-06-15 22:45:01 EDT --- Updated to 0.6.0. Spec URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/apiextractor.spec SRPM URL: http://kalev.fedorapeople.org/apiextractor-0.6.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2252774 -- Configure 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
