[Bug 620000] Review Request: hatari - An Atari ST emulator suitable for playing games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62 --- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 06:32:55 EST --- Koji scratch build for F-14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2599856 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652533] Review Request: postgresql-pgrouting - Provides routing functionality to PostGIS/PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533 --- Comment #7 from viji vijivijayaku...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 06:42:01 EST --- Spec URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/pgRouting.spec SRPM URL: http://viji.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/pgRouting-1.03-3.fc14.src.rpm Updated the package, please verify. Also, regarding the name, I have changed it to pgRouting. Now it is matching with upstream project name and tarball name - What do you think? $ rpmlint /home/viji/rpmbuild/SRPMS/pgRouting-1.03-3.fc14.src.rpm pgRouting.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean pgRouting.src: W: no-buildroot-tag pgRouting.src: W: no-%clean-section 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint /home/viji/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/pgRouting-1.03-3.fc14.x86_64.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 620000] Review Request: hatari - An Atari ST emulator suitable for playing games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62
--- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 07:04:13 EST
---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is silent
sulaco ~: rpmlint ~/Desktop/hatari-*
hatari.src: W: invalid-url Source1: hatari-1.4.0-debian-manpages.tar.gz
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
sulaco ~:
This may be safely ignored.
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+/- The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. I have only few (maybe not so
important) notes:
* I don't like this Requires %{name} line in ui sub-package. Does it means
that UI should work fine with previous versions of hatari?
* Regarding python support - the explicit Requires: python2 also worries me -
I strongly suggest you to test whether hatari-ui works with python3 since we
already ship python3 in F-14 an higher.
Anyway these two are not a blockers - just a friendly reminders.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (GPLv2
or later).
- The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package (gpl.txt),
MUST be included in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum hatari-1.4.0.tar.bz2*
690e21bd2210a7e86af5d76ccc7f4e608aae37df466d2ead2ac4d105a637bc7b
hatari-1.4.0.tar.bz2
690e21bd2210a7e86af5d76ccc7f4e608aae37df466d2ead2ac4d105a637bc7b
hatari-1.4.0.tar.bz2.1
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji link above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
0 The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so).
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
+ The package includes a %{name}.desktop file, and this file is properly
installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Ok, so, please, mark gpl.txt as %doc and I'll finish it. Also it would be great
if you comment my notes regarding dependencies in *-ui sub-package.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 614329] Review Request: emacs-common-w3m - W3m interface for Emacsen
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=614329 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michel+...@michelsylvain.in ||fo Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 07:58:18 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: emacs-common-w3m New Branches: el6 Owners: salimma InitialCC: Needed for full functionality of pure's emacs mode. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652533] Review Request: postgresql-pgrouting - Provides routing functionality to PostGIS/PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533 --- Comment #9 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 08:19:36 EST --- Created attachment 460368 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=460368 Generates a patch given a purpose and backup files named .purpose -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652533] Review Request: postgresql-pgrouting - Provides routing functionality to PostGIS/PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 08:18:32 EST --- That looks good. I normally use the exact version number (e.g. 1.03) but that's partly an artifact of generating the patches automatically (I'm attaching my patch-generating script here for reference). But as long as the version number is unambiguous that's good enough as a practice. Everything looks good. APPROVED. As before, add me to the Cc: 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 620000] Review Request: hatari - An Atari ST emulator suitable for playing games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62
--- Comment #6 from Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 09:04:18
EST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
* I don't like this Requires %{name} line in ui sub-package. Does it means
that UI should work fine with previous versions of hatari?
No. You are right. I changed the Require to use a fully versioned dependency.
* Regarding python support - the explicit Requires: python2 also worries me
-
I strongly suggest you to test whether hatari-ui works with python3 since we
already ship python3 in F-14 an higher.
AFAIK Python3 is an optional component since F13. Critical system components
will continue to use Python 2:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Python3F13
Anyway, I mailed upstream author asking if hatari-ui will support python3 in
the future.
Spec URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/hatari.spec
SRPM URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/hatari-1.4.0-3.fc14.src.rpm
Changelog:
- ui subpackage now requires the fully versioned base package
- more consistent macro usage
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652987] Review Request: go - The Go programming language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652987 --- Comment #4 from Brandon bran...@pwnage.ca 2010-11-14 09:18:04 EST --- I ran into the following issues. 1) Upstream didn't want it packaged. They don't have a stable 1.0 yet, was the reason. 2) Time Take over from me if you want. I'm busy doing ambassador work these days and I'm a huge noob at packaging. Someone else would do a much better job. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 610934] Review Request: go - The Google Go Programming Language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=610934 --- Comment #14 from Brandon bran...@pwnage.ca 2010-11-14 09:19:58 EST --- Take over, I explain why in his new bug. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 620000] Review Request: hatari - An Atari ST emulator suitable for playing games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62
--- Comment #7 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 09:49:49 EST
---
Ok, good. But still no gpl.txt in docs. I advice you to add something like this
into %install section:
install -p -m 0644 gpl.txt %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/%{name}-%{version}
This is the only issue left unresolved.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 532554] Review Request: asterisk-sounds-moh-opsound - Music on hold sound files for Asterisk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532554 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 10:02:27 EST --- Well, sure, I'm familiar with the license of the works from opsound. The problem is that there seems to be no indication that the stuff came from opsound. g. I guess if you can find it somewhere with an acceptable license then we can use it as that license, but if you follow the URLs (which is the only real indication of where the the files come from) you get licensing information that conflicts. Not to mention that opsound works are cc-by-sa 2.5, not 3.0 as stated in the LICENSE file. So, massively confusing all around; the asterisk guys really seem have trouble with the whole license thing. I honestly don't know what to do; my feeling is that we know we have at least one source that gives us a useful license, and the 2.5/3.0 thing is pretty minor, but I'd still like to see if spot has anything to add. This has been sitting around for over a year so it shouldn't really hurt to wait a bit more so that we're sure we're OK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 620000] Review Request: hatari - An Atari ST emulator suitable for playing games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62 --- Comment #8 from Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 10:27:37 EST --- Spec URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/hatari.spec SRPM URL: http://musuruan.fedorapeople.org/hatari-1.4.0-4.fc14.src.rpm Changelog: - added license among docs -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652987] Review Request: go - The Go programming language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652987 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 10:29:14 EST --- If you want to ask legal questions, you need to make sure the legal folks see them. Adding FE-Legal blocker (or you can ask on the legal mailing 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 652544] Review Request: erlang-rpm-macros - Macros for simplifying building of Erlang packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652544
--- Comment #1 from Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 10:44:15
EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [1]
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x] Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x] PreReq is not used.
[!] Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [2]
[x] Buildroot is correct.
[x] Package run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) and the beginning of
%install.
[-] Package use %makeinstall only when ``make install DESTDIR=...'' doesn't
work.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[x] Changelog in prescribed format.
[!] Rpmlint output is NOT silent.
$ rpmlint erlang-rpm-macros-0.1.1-1.fc14.src.rpm
erlang-rpm-macros.src:44: W: macro-in-comment %doc
erlang-rpm-macros.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
lemenkov-erlang-rpm-macros-0.1.1-0-g6838d80.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
$ rpmlint erlang-rpm-macros-0.1.1-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
erlang-rpm-macros.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
erlang-rpm-macros.noarch: W: no-documentation
erlang-rpm-macros.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/rpm/macros.erlang
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x] 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 is included in %doc.
[-] License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[3,4]
[!] Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package : 8dc6ce97c0aa64a0fae8ee45b9c6bd0e
MD5SUM upstream package : 8dc6ce97c0aa64a0fae8ee45b9c6bd0e
[-] Compiler flags are appropriate.
[-] %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[-] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[!] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Each %files section contains %defattr.
[x] No %config files under /usr.
[!] %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using
desktop-file-install file if it is a GUI application. [5]
[-] Package contains a valid .desktop file.
[!] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x] File names are valid UTF-8.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Package contains no bundled libraries.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
[-] Package contains no static executables.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[-] Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[!] Package does not genrate any conflict.
[x] Package does not contains kernel modules.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on F14/x86_64
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x] Package installs properly.
[x] Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[!] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [6]
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[-] Package functions as described.
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[!] If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
[Bug 620000] Review Request: hatari - An Atari ST emulator suitable for playing games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 10:45:01 EST --- Ok, good. I don't see any other issues, so this package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 523540] Review Request: opentracker - BitTorrent Tracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523540 --- Comment #66 from Simon Wesp cassmod...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 10:58:35 EST --- http://cassmodiah.fedorapeople.org/opentracker/opentracker-0-0.14.20101114cvs.fc15.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 541463] Review Request: garmin-sync - Download data from Garmin fitness computers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=541463 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ti...@math.uh.edu Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 11:33:55 EST --- Not sure why nobody has looked at this yet; there's not much to it. It still builds OK and installs on rawhide. I haven't any hardware I could use to test it but I suspect that given that upstream is dead and nothing has changed, it will work as well as it ever did. For modern Fedora there are a few things you can remove: BuildRoot, %clean and the first line of %install. Otherwise rpmlint just complains about the lack of a manpage. That's always nice to fix but it's not essential. APPROVED * source files match upstream. sha256sum: efc4e1410d22a50ebe58e09d291ee0e46254cb6e0f367f2e3b569df848ff5dfb garmin-sync-0.3.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: garmin-sync = 0.3-3.fc15 = /usr/bin/env pyusb * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no generically named files * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 541483] Review Request: MakerDialog - Utility that conveniently handle configuration properties
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=541483 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||BuildFails --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 11:40:23 EST --- This package fails to build: /usr/lib64/ccache/gcc -Wall CMakeFiles/MakerDialogGConfSchemas.dir/MakerDialogConfigGConfSchemas.o -o MakerDialogGConfSchemas -rdynamic libMakerDialogGConf.so.0.2 libMakerDialog.so.0.2 -lgconf-2 -lglib-2.0 -Wl,-rpath,/builddir/build/BUILD/MakerDialog-0.2.0-Source/bin /usr/bin/ld: CMakeFiles/MakerDialogGConfSchemas.dir/MakerDialogConfigGConfSchemas.o: undefined reference to symbol 'g_type_init' /usr/bin/ld: note: 'g_type_init' is defined in DSO /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0 so try adding it to the linker command line /lib64/libgobject-2.0.so.0: could not read symbols: Invalid operation collect2: ld returned 1 exit status A scratch build showing the failure: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2600110 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 542436] Review Request: python-cloudfiles - Python language bindings for Rackspace CloudFiles API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=542436 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 11:45:50 EST --- No response in many months; I'll close this soon if nothing happens. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558849] Review Request: Jep - Java Embedded Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558849 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 558374] Review Request: nips-promela-compiler - Compile Promela into NIPS VM for state-based model checking
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=558374 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution||NOTABUG Last Closed||2010-11-14 12:21:02 --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 12:21:02 EST --- No response in ages; I'm just going to close this. There's really no point in submitting something for review that can't even be built anyway. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653146] New: Review Request: python-genshi06 - Toolkit for stream-based generation of output for the web
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-genshi06 - Toolkit for stream-based generation of output for the web https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653146 Summary: Review Request: python-genshi06 - Toolkit for stream-based generation of output for the web Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ke...@tummy.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/python-genshi06/python-genshi06.spec SRPM URL: http://www.scrye.com/~kevin/fedora/python-genshi06/python-genshi06-0.6-1.el6.src.rpm Description: Genshi is a Python library that provides an integrated set of components for parsing, generating, and processing HTML, XML or other textual content for output generation on the web. The major feature is a template language, which is heavily inspired by Kid. This version is a compat version for EPEL6 only. It's needed by the newest version of trac. As soon as RHEL6 updates this package (possibly in 6.1 or 6.2) it will be dropped. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2598115 rpmlint says: python-genshi06.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Genshi - Gens hi, Gens-hi, Genseric python-genshi06.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US compat - compar, compact, combat python-genshi06.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Genshi - Gens hi, Gens-hi, Genseric python-genshi06.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US compat - compar, compact, combat 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. (which can all be ignored) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 639291] Review Request: erlang-mustache - Mustache template engine for Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639291 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 12:28:40 EST --- erlang-mustache-0.1.0-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 639291] Review Request: erlang-mustache - Mustache template engine for Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639291 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|erlang-mustache-0.1.0-2.fc1 |erlang-mustache-0.1.0-2.el5 |4 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 645186] Review Request: xavante - Lua Web Server with WSAPI support
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=645186 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 12:28:33 EST --- xavante-2.2.1-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 639278] Review Request: erlang-lfe - Lisp Flavoured Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639278
--- Comment #10 from Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de 2010-11-14 12:42:53
EST ---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
(+) rpmlint is not silent, some messages can be ignored:
- spelling errors are false positives
- only-non-binary-in-usr-lib and no-binary: general Erlang packaging problem
which cannot
be avoided in the package
- Explicit lib dependency is required, as no shared lib that can be
auto-detected
- no-documentation: I suggest adding README and COPYRIGHT file (see below),
there is also documentation in doc/, why is it not included? You might also
want to include the examples as doc.
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (BSD).
- The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
- There is a COPYRIGHT file containing the license, it must be included in
the %doc section
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
package# sha256sum rvirding-lfe-v0.6.1-0-g1bcf461.tar.gz
e84a8c8e743badcae9438b66897210c6266f79d580fa9d67fa0dfcd0eff0d976
rvirding-lfe-v0.6.1-0-g1bcf461.tar.gz
downloaded# sha256sum ~/download/rvirding-lfe-v0.6.1-0-g1bcf461.tar.gz
e84a8c8e743badcae9438b66897210c6266f79d580fa9d67fa0dfcd0eff0d976
~/download/rvirding-lfe-v0.6.1-0-g1bcf461.tar.gz
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
+ The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
+ No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1).
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
The documentation should be fixed, the inclusion of the COPYRIGHT file must be
fixed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 620000] Review Request: hatari - An Atari ST emulator suitable for playing games
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=62 Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-11-14 12:56:49 --- Comment #10 from Andrea Musuruane musur...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 12:56:49 EST --- Thanks for the review. Built and published for rawhide only. Asked a FESCo updates process exception for at least F14: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/493 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 652533] Review Request: postgresql-pgrouting - Provides routing functionality to PostGIS/PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652533 viji vijivijayaku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from viji vijivijayaku...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 13:29:41 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pgRouting Short Description: Provides routing functionality to PostGIS/PostgreSQL Owners: viji Branches: f13 f14 InitialCC: salimma -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 499992] Review Request: mingw32-webkitgtk - MinGW Windows web content engine 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=42 --- Comment #15 from Erik van Pienbroek erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl 2010-11-14 13:39:49 EST --- New Spec URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-webkitgtk.spec New SRPM URL: http://www.ftd4linux.nl/contrib/mingw32-webkitgtk-1.3.6-1.fc14.src.rpm Koji scratch build (F15): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2600627 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 550104] Review Request: magento - Magento is an ecommerce web application.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=550104 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 13:46:30 EST --- Looks like those modifications never happened. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 549605] Review Request: libopenr2 - MFC/R2 call setup 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=549605 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter --- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 13:48:12 EST --- Were the licensing issues ever clarified? How about some response to the above commentary? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 546169] Review Request: libtar-ng : tar 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=546169 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution||NOTABUG Last Closed||2010-11-14 13:51:58 --- Comment #37 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 13:51:58 EST --- No response after many months; I'll just close this out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 627936] Review Request: bowtie - An ultrafast, memory-efficient short read aligner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627936 Adam Huffman bl...@verdurin.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dw...@infradead.org Component|Package Review |0x --- Comment #5 from Adam Huffman bl...@verdurin.com 2010-11-14 14:01:51 EST --- Upstream says that the shebang will be included in the next 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 639278] Review Request: erlang-lfe - Lisp Flavoured Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639278 --- Comment #11 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 14:10:03 EST --- Made several docs fixes: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-lfe.spec http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-lfe-0.6.1-4.fc12.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2600681 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 546169] Review Request: libtar-ng : tar 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=546169 Kamil Dudka kdu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #38 from Kamil Dudka kdu...@redhat.com 2010-11-14 14:08:27 EST --- (In reply to comment #37) No response after many months; I'll just close this out. libtar-ng needs to be packaged. There has been no update of libtar since 2003. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 632858] Review Request: emacs-slime - The superior lisp interaction mode for emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=632858 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 14:21:24 EST --- Changes look good. 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 598511] Review Request: libgtextutils - Assaf Gordon text utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598511 --- Comment #11 from Adam Huffman bl...@verdurin.com 2010-11-14 14:21:09 EST --- For reference, I've put a new version with the licensing and formatting fixes at: http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/libgtextutils/libgtextutils.spec http://verdurin.fedorapeople.org/reviews/libgtextutils/libgtextutils-0.6-4.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 598511] Review Request: libgtextutils - Assaf Gordon text utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598511 Adam Huffman bl...@verdurin.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Adam Huffman bl...@verdurin.com 2010-11-14 14:23:24 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: libgtextutils Short Description: Assaf Gordon text utilities Owners: verdurin Branches: f13 f14 el5 el6 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 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 --- Comment #9 from Luca Botti luca.bo...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 14:42:15 EST --- Hi Michel, thanks for the review and the suggestions. You can find new version of spec and src.rpm in http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-reversion.spec and http://lucabotti.fedorapeople.org/packages/django-reversion-1.3.2-2.fc14.src.rpm Regards -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 546169] Review Request: libtar-ng : tar 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=546169 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Last Closed|2010-11-14 13:51:58 |2010-11-14 14:44:14 --- Comment #39 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 14:44:14 EST --- Then submit your own review request for it. This review is stalled because the submitter is not responding and, according to policy, is 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 652396] Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-core - Core files required by BoxGrinder
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652396
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-11-14
14:48:15 EST ---
Some notes
* Licensing
- It seems that openhash/openhash.rb comes from hashery gem
( the latest version of hashery gem is 1.3.0). Also the license
of lib/hashery/openhash.rb in hashery 1.3.0 is currently under
ASL 2.0.
- Would you tell me where openhash/openhash.rb (in boxgrinder-core
gem) came from?
- Also would you show us if the license of openhash.rb is really
under MIT?
- And. bundling files in other projects is generally forbidden
and needs FPC's approval. Would you consider to package
rubygem-hashery seperately?
* BuildRoot line / %clean section
- BuildRoot line is no longer needed on Fedora and EPEL6
- %clean section is no longer needed on Fedora 12+ and EPEL6.
* Unneeded version specific dependency
- = 1.2 part on R: rubygems or so are all unneeded
( Only that = %{abi} part on R: ruby(abi) is needed )
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Explicit_Requires
( Please see the last 2 sentences in this section )
* Output file on %check
- If %check section produces some extra files, it is preferable
that %check section won't touch %buildroot tree to avoid
unneeded confusion on %files and will touch files under
%_builddir
( i.e. In this case, it is preferable that gem is once installed
under %_builddir and then copy the whole tree to %buildroot
at %install, then execute %check under %_builddir)
* Ability to build
- Your srpm does not build on koji for dist-rawhide (at least).
At least, BR: rubygem(rake) rubygem(open4) is needed (for %check)
(and perhaps also rubygem(rspec))
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 547621] Review Request: django-googlecharts - A suite of template tags for Django to assist in generating charts using Google's Chart API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=547621 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 548422] Review Request: flash-kernel - Utility for writing kernels into flash memory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548422 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ti...@math.uh.edu --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 15:13:38 EST --- Just looking at ancient review tickets. This one is a bit weird; is there no real upstream besides the debian package? I guess they don't have the same rule about not doing upstream development as Fedora does. Also, the current version seems to be 2.36; 2.27 is no longer available for download. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652544] Review Request: erlang-rpm-macros - Macros for simplifying building of Erlang packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652544 --- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 15:20:33 EST --- Thanks for these issues found - I'll package new version soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 548522] Review Request: autotest-client - Autotest is a framework for fully automated testing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=548522 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter --- Comment #10 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-11-14 15:20:24 EST --- I note that the spec and srpm links all seem to be 404. And from reading the commentary, I have a hard time imagining that any package reviewer worth their salt would be willing to approve the FHS violations mentioned. And to avoid the kind of upstream does it, and even if it's completely broken I don't want to deviate from upstream rationalization seen above, I'll propose a guideline change. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #10 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 15:33:37 EST --- Hi Luca, Looks good -- with one minor glitch, that you can fix when importing the package: you have *two* %changelog section! Please rpmlint the .spec file when you make changes. Review is APPROVED, since the fix is trivial enough. And I've sponsored you. Please follow the next step in the review guidelines: 1. Change fedora-cvs flag to ? and create a new SCM request: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests you only need to request the stable branches; 'master' targets Rawhide and you automatically get that For your next several packages, please put me in the InitialCc: list, and you're more than welcome to mail me with any packaging question or review requests. 2. Build package for Rawhide and other stable branches http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_Fedora_GIT 3. Apart from el6 (which just went stable), the stable branches all required updates to be pushed through Bodhi; please create an update request for this package there: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/new You can list the built packages for multiple distributions on the same form; they will share all properties (description, bugs closed, automatic push karma and automatic cancellation karma etc.) but will be partitioned based on the targeted release. Welcome to the packaging club :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 639278] Review Request: erlang-lfe - Lisp Flavoured Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639278 Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de 2010-11-14 15:45:13 EST --- Looks good to me now. You should document all changes in the changelog. 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 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 --- Comment #12 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 16:24:39 EST --- Cc:ing myself -- and removing new lines from the description :) New Package SCM Request === Package Name: django-reversion Short Description: Reversion is an extension to the Django web framework that provides comprehensive version control facilities. Owners: lucabotti Branches: f13 f14 el5 el6 InitialCC: salimma -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 Luca Botti luca.bo...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 637507] Review Request: php-phpunit-Text-Template - Simple template engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637507 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:27:43 EST --- php-phpunit-Text-Template-1.0.0-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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 630509] Review Request: ghc-split - Combinator library for splitting lists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630509 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:32:19 EST --- ghc-split-0.1.2.1-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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 637507] Review Request: php-phpunit-Text-Template - Simple template engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637507 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:34:29 EST --- php-phpunit-Text-Template-1.0.0-2.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 637507] Review Request: php-phpunit-Text-Template - Simple template engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637507 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-phpunit-Text-Template-1 |php-phpunit-Text-Template-1 |.0.0-2.fc14 |.0.0-2.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630509] Review Request: ghc-split - Combinator library for splitting lists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630509 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-split-0.1.2.1-1.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-11-14 16:32:24 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630264] Review Request: ghc-bytestring-trie - An efficient finite map from (byte)strings to values
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630264 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:30:19 EST --- ghc-bytestring-trie-0.2.2-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update ghc-bytestring-trie'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-bytestring-trie-0.2.2-1.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650992] Review Request: emacs-auto-complete - Intelligent auto-complete extension for GNU Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650992 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:31:19 EST --- emacs-auto-complete-1.3-1.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update emacs-auto-complete'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/emacs-auto-complete-1.3-1.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630509] Review Request: ghc-split - Combinator library for splitting lists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630509 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-split-0.1.2.1-1.fc14|ghc-split-0.1.2.1-1.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590680] Review Request: maven-license-plugin - Maven plugin to update header licenses of source files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590680 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:37:12 EST --- maven-license-plugin-1.8.0-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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 637511] Review Request: php-phpunit-PHP-CodeCoverage - PHP code coverage 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=637511 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||php-phpunit-PHP-CodeCoverag ||e-1.0.0-1.fc14.1 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-11-14 16:38:04 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 637491] Review Request: perl-Params-Classify - Argument type classification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637491 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:38:11 EST --- perl-Params-Classify-0.012-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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 630509] Review Request: ghc-split - Combinator library for splitting lists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630509 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:36:31 EST --- ghc-split-0.1.2.1-1.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 590680] Review Request: maven-license-plugin - Maven plugin to update header licenses of source files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590680 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||maven-license-plugin-1.8.0- ||2.fc14 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 641429] Review Request: mingw32-dbus - MinGW Windows port of DBus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641429 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw32-dbus-1.4.1-0.1.2010 ||1008git.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-11-14 16:38:56 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641429] Review Request: mingw32-dbus - MinGW Windows port of DBus
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641429 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 16:38:51 EST --- mingw32-dbus-1.4.1-0.1.20101008git.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 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 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 --- Comment #13 from Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de 2010-11-14 16:42:12 EST --- I wonder why you don't use the one-liner from the bug summary, and even that could be shorted to something like Django extension to provide version control. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 623606] Review Request: gxneur - GTK front-end for X Neural Switcher
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=623606 Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de --- Comment #3 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2010-11-14 17:09:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) - I start with the most unimportant one. I have the feeling that most Fedora packagers prefer one line for every single build dependency in order to make the spec file more legible. However, I did not find anything specific about this in the guidelines and so probably this is up to you. Yes, this is up to the packager and isn't a blocker here. - I think you were not accurate enough with the license tags. The code in src/ states GPLv2+ (not just GPLv2) as license and some of the code in m4/ seems to be licensed under the LGPL. The License field must reflect the license of the *binary* package. Thus, only packaged files have to be considered when determining the license. The m4 files are merely required together with the autotools during configuration. So GPLv2+ is the correct tag for this package. %post update-desktop-database /dev/null || : %postun update-desktop-database /dev/null || : That's not necessary here. Calling desktop-file-install or desktop-file-validate in %install is sufficient. You usually have to refresh the desktop database only if the desktop file contains a MimeType field. - I think the description maybe a bit problematic. The Packaging Guidelines state that a phrasing like a program like ... should be avoided since people might understand you wrong (or might _want_ to understand you wrong) when it comes to trademarks. I agree -- a more detailed description would be nice. Without further investigation, I don't really understand what the program does. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 --- Comment #14 from Luca Botti luca.bo...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 17:35:21 EST --- Just the emotion ;-) New Package SCM Request === Package Name: django-reversion Short Description: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities Owners: lucabotti Branches: f13 f14 el5 el6 InitialCC: salimma -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652987] Review Request: go - The Go programming language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652987 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||michel+...@michelsylvain.in ||fo AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|michel+...@michelsylvain.in ||fo Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 17:43:02 EST --- Will review once the legal situation is clarified. FWIW I think Google will be willing to relicense; WebM was in this situation earlier on. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 --- Comment #15 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@michelsylvain.info 2010-11-14 18:08:44 EST --- You don't want the package name in the description either though, just the package summary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 --- Comment #16 from Tim Niemueller t...@niemueller.de 2010-11-14 18:39:50 EST --- Indeed, the django-reversion - part has to go, it should just be Django -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630288] Review Request: ghc-enumerator - Implementation of Oleg Kiselyov's left-fold enumerators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630288 Bug 630288 depends on bug 630270, which changed state. Bug 630270 Summary: Review Request: ghc-transformers - Concrete functor and monad transformers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630270 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #2 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 19:22:33 EST --- The srpm url is not accessible http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-enumerator/ghc-enumerator-0.4.2-1.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630288] Review Request: ghc-enumerator - Implementation of Oleg Kiselyov's left-fold enumerators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630288 Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(maths...@gmail.co ||m) --- Comment #3 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 19:26:48 EST --- The spec file at this URL http://benboeckel.net/packaging/ghc-enumerator/ghc-enumerator.spec does not match the version of srpm (0.4.2). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 537983] Review Request: python-visual - 3D Programming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537983 --- Comment #37 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 19:37:40 EST --- python-visual-5.32-10.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-visual-5.32-10.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630223] Review Request: ghc-failure - A simple type class for success/failure computations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630223 Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lakshminaras2...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lakshminaras2...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 487044] Review Request: eee-control - Asus Eee PC hardware control and configuration 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=487044
Ruediger Landmann r.landm...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|r.landm...@redhat.com
Flag||fedora-review?,
||needinfo?(r...@greysector.ne
||t)
--- Comment #31 from Ruediger Landmann r.landm...@redhat.com 2010-11-14
19:44:55 EST ---
Thanks Dominik!
Just a few things here that need attention.
Also note that unless you plan to package this for EPEL, you don't need:
* the BuildRoot:
* rm -rf %{buildroot} under %install
* the %clean section.
Please rebuild to fix the issues below:
- = N/A
/ = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output is clean:
$ rpmlint SPECS/eee-control.spec
SPECS/eee-control.spec:10: W: macro-in-comment %{name}
SPECS/eee-control.spec:10: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
SPECS/eee-control.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: eee-control-0.9.6.tar.gz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
$ rpmlint SRPMS/eee-control-0.9.6-1.fc14.src.rpm
eee-control.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Asus - Aus, Asur, Apus
eee-control.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hotkeys - hot
keys, hot-keys, hotcakes
eee-control.src:10: W: macro-in-comment %{name}
eee-control.src:10: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
eee-control.src: W: invalid-url Source0: eee-control-0.9.6.tar.gz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
$ rpmlint RPMS/i686/eee-control-0.9.6-1.fc14.i686.rpm
eee-control.i686: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Asus - Aus, Asur,
Apus
eee-control.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US hotkeys - hot
keys, hot-keys, hotcakes
eee-control.i686: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/xdg/autostart/eee-control-tray.desktop
eee-control.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/eee-control-0.9.6/eee-dispswitch.sh
eee-control.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/eee-control-0.9.6/eee-control-query
eee-control.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary eee-control-daemon
eee-control.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary eee-control-tray
eee-control.i686: W: service-default-enabled
/etc/rc.d/init.d/eee-control-daemon
eee-control.i686: W: incoherent-subsys
/etc/rc.d/init.d/eee-control-daemon $prog
eee-control.i686: W: incoherent-init-script-name eee-control-daemon
('eee-control', 'eee-controld')
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.
$ rpmlint RPMS/i686/eee-control-debuginfo-0.9.6-1.fc14.i686.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
eee-control.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: eee-control-0.9.6.tar.gz
See notes below on tarball
eee-control.i686: W: non-conffile-in-etc
/etc/xdg/autostart/eee-control-tray.desktop
This is as expected, no problem
eee-control.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/eee-control-0.9.6/eee-dispswitch.sh
eee-control.i686: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/share/doc/eee-control-0.9.6/eee-control-query
These (and eee-control-setup.sh) shouldn't be in doc, should they?
eee-control.i686: W: service-default-enabled
/etc/rc.d/init.d/eee-control-daemon
This is intentional and necessary, right?
eee-control.i686: W: incoherent-subsys
/etc/rc.d/init.d/eee-control-daemon $prog
eee-control.i686: W: incoherent-init-script-name eee-control-daemon
('eee-control', 'eee-controld')
The init script name should be the same as the package name in lower
case.
[/] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[/] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[/] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Language specific
items
[!] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
As Christoph Wickert points out in Comment #15, the package contains
Asus' Eee logo, in eee-icon.png and eee-icon-small.png. Where do the other
icons in the same directory come from?
[!] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
ISC license properly identified for the main file, but some icons in
/usr/share/eee-control are from the GNOME icon set, which is GPL
(see icons here: http://people.freedesktop.org/~jimmac/icons/#git and
license here: http://art.gnome.org/ )
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
[Bug 537983] Review Request: python-visual - 3D Programming
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=537983 --- Comment #38 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-11-14 19:46:52 EST --- python-visual-5.32-10.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-visual-5.32-10.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 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format 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=523877 --- Comment #26 from Tim Fenn f...@stanford.edu 2010-11-14 22:04:35 EST --- (In reply to comment #25) A scratch build showing the failure: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2574534 Please clear the whiteboard if providing a package which builds. fixed/updated: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601008 Spec URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib.spec SRPM URL: http://www.stanford.edu/~fenn/packs/CBFlib-0.9.1-1.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650767] Review Request: aiki - A CMS Creator Web Application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650767 --- Comment #6 from Steven Garcia webwha...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 23:15:08 EST --- Updated to upstream 0.6.6, changed license field. Spec URL: http://aikiframework.org/files/pkgs/0.6.6/aiki.spec SRPM URL: http://aikiframework.org/files/pkgs/0.6.6/aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm $ rpmlint SPECS/aiki.spec \ SRPMS/aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm \ RPMS/noarch/aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Ran successful mock rebuild $ mock --rebuild SRPMS/aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm INFO: mock.py version 1.1.6 starting... State Changed: init plugins INFO: selinux disabled State Changed: start INFO: Start(SRPMS/aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm) Config(fedora-13-i386) State Changed: lock buildroot State Changed: clean INFO: chroot (/var/lib/mock/fedora-13-i386) unlocked and deleted State Changed: init State Changed: lock buildroot Mock Version: 1.1.6 INFO: Mock Version: 1.1.6 INFO: enabled root cache State Changed: unpacking root cache INFO: enabled yum cache State Changed: cleaning yum metadata INFO: enabled ccache State Changed: running yum State Changed: setup State Changed: build INFO: Done(SRPMS/aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm) Config(default) 1 minutes 7 seconds INFO: Results and/or logs in: /var/lib/mock/fedora-13-i386/result Ran more successful koji scratch builds https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/tasks?owner=fosdevelstate=all $ koji build --scratch dist-f13 aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601050 $ koji build --scratch dist-f13-kde aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601047 $ koji build --scratch dist-f13-updates-candidate aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601058 $ koji build --scratch dist-f14 aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601061 $ koji build --scratch dist-f14-gobject aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601053 $ koji build --scratch dist-f14-kde aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601048 $ koji build --scratch dist-f14-updates-candidate aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601054 $ koji build --scratch dist-f15 aiki-0.6.6-1.fc13.src.rpm http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601057 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652835] Review Request: ktikz - Editor for the TikZ language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652835 Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich kr...@land.ru changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kr...@land.ru --- Comment #1 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich kr...@land.ru 2010-11-14 23:27:28 EST --- Any example file to test? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651097] Review Request: museum font - a font based on historical metal Centaur fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651097 Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||panem...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Parag AN(पराग) panem...@gmail.com 2010-11-14 23:28:52 EST --- I have sponsored susmit now. He should now continue from step7 given in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/NewPackageProcess -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226477] Merge Review: tanukiwrapper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226477 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ASSIGNED Resolution|NOTABUG | Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com 2010-11-15 00:04:17 EST --- I would like to maintain this package. Due Fedora policy on retired packages in need to go through review again: SPEC: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/tanukiwrapper.orig/tanukiwrapper.spec SRC.RPM: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/tanukiwrapper.orig/tanukiwrapper-3.2.3-5.fc12.src.rpm This is the version of tanukiwrapper which already has been in Fedora (last update on July 2010). No changes from me. I wanted to package latest version of Tanukiwrapper, but it change license, which is non-free: http://www.mail-archive.com/le...@lists.fedoraproject.org/msg00253.html This is most probably non-intentional change and upstream may be willing to release it under some free license, so I contact them If they are willing to do some change toward free license. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 639278] Review Request: erlang-lfe - Lisp Flavoured Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=639278 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #13 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-11-15 00:15:49 EST --- Thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: erlang-lfe Short Description: Lisp Flavoured Erlang Owners: peter Branches: f13 f14 el5 el6 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 518636] Review Request: django-reversion - Django extension that provides version control capabilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518636 --- Comment #17 from Luca Botti luca.bo...@gmail.com 2010-11-15 00:35:39 EST --- That's it - lesson learned :-) New Package SCM Request === Package Name: django-reversion Short Description: Django extension that provides version control capabilities Owners: lucabotti Branches: f13 f14 el5 el6 InitialCC: salimma -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652835] Review Request: ktikz - Editor for the TikZ language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652835 --- Comment #2 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2010-11-15 00:36:36 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Any example file to test? Sure. Any example avaible in the 320-page PGF manual, in /usr/share/texmf/doc/generic/pgf/version-for-pdftex/en/pgfmanual.pdf -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652835] Review Request: ktikz - Editor for the TikZ language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652835 Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich kr...@land.ru changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kr...@land.ru Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich kr...@land.ru 2010-11-15 01:26:42 EST --- Ah, 175M to download. This will take a while. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 651097] Review Request: museum font - a font based on historical metal Centaur fonts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=651097 Susmit thinklinux@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Susmit thinklinux@gmail.com 2010-11-15 01:26:20 EST --- Thanks a lot Parag. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: levien-museum-fonts Short Description: A font based on historical metal Centaur fonts. Owners: susmit Branches: f13, f14 InitialCC: none -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 579662] Review Request: emacs-lookup - Search Interface with Electronic Dictionaries for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579662
Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2010-11-15 01:52:27 EST
---
Thanks. Here is the review:
+:ok, !:needs attention, NA: not applicable
MUST Items:
[+] MUST: rpmlint output:
emacs-lookup.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
emacs-lookup.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
emacs-lookup.src: W: no-%clean-section
emacs-lookup-el.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Elisp - Elis, Lisp,
Elise
emacs-lookup-el.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US elisp - lisp,
e lisp, Elise
emacs-lookup-el.noarch: W: no-documentation
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
packaging follows Packaging:Emacs guidelines
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines
source files have gpl headers
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[!] MUST: include license files in %doc if included in source
Please add the COPYING file
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English and be legible.
[+] MUST: source md5sum matches upstream release
5f66507835f8636bd3a91243d0760a46 lookup-1.4.1.tar.gz
[+] MUST: must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on one main arch
[NA] MUST: if necessary use ExcludeArch for other archs
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[NA] MUST: use %find_lang macro for .po translations
[NA] MUST: packages with shared library files in the dynamic linker's default
paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[NA] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[NA] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates, or require a
package which does create that directory.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing
(except license files if necessary).
[+] 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 consistently use macros
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[NA] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[NA] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[NA] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA] MUST: If a package has 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.
[NA] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
[NA] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should be
removed in the spec.
[NA] 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:
[NA] 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.
Might be nice to add later at some point, if possible.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2601192
[+] 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: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
Please be sure to include the COPYING file before importing to SCM.
I think it is better also to convert NEWS to utf8, though not sure
if the guidelines insist on that.
Package is APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because:
[Bug 579662] Review Request: emacs-lookup - Search Interface with Electronic Dictionaries for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579662 --- Comment #8 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2010-11-15 01:55:09 EST --- Created attachment 460484 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=460484 emacs-lookup.spec-1.patch Little patch that takes care of COPYING and NEWS 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 652835] Review Request: ktikz - Editor for the TikZ language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652835
Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich kr...@land.ru changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Dmitrij S. Kryzhevich kr...@land.ru 2010-11-15 01:59:39
EST ---
OK, here is.
+ - OK, 0 - not require.
[+]: rpmlint is almost silent but wrong possitive spelling warning.
[+]: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
[+]: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+]: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
[+]: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines .
[+]: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
[+]: File, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, included in
%doc.
[+]: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+]: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+]: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[+]: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
[0]: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
[+]: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[+]: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[0]: 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.
[+]: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[0]: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review.
[+]: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+]: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)
[+]: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+]: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+]: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[0]: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+]: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of
the application.
[0]: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[0]: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[0]: 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.
[0]: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}.
[+]: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
[+]: 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.
[+]: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+]: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
SHOULD Items:
[+] The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[+] The reviewer should test that the package functions as described. A package
should not segfault instead of running, for example.
[+] If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[+] your package should contain man pages for binaries/scripts.
/===/
/ 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 579662] Review Request: emacs-lookup - Search Interface with Electronic Dictionaries for Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=579662 Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Daiki Ueno du...@redhat.com 2010-11-15 02:00:32 EST --- Thanks for the review and patch. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: emacs-lookup Short Description: Search Interface with Electronic Dictionaries for Emacs Owners: ueno Branches: f14 f13 InitialCC: i18n-team -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652835] Review Request: ktikz - Editor for the TikZ language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652835 --- Comment #5 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2010-11-15 02:28:43 EST --- Thanks for your efficient 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 652835] Review Request: ktikz - Editor for the TikZ language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652835 Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2010-11-15 02:29:59 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ktikz Short Description: Editor for the TikZ language Owners: melmorabity Branches: f13 f14 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 491331] Review Request: spacewalk-config - Spacewalk Configuration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=491331 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(msu...@redhat.com | |) | --- Comment #12 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com 2010-11-15 02:33:46 EST --- I dig up more info about usual location of startup.pl and find that it is indeed sometimes located in /usr/share. So I moved it. Updated SRPM: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/spacewalk-config/spacewalk-config-1.2.7-1.el6.src.rpm SPEC: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/spacewalk-config/spacewalk-config.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
