[Bug 661833] Review Request: kdevelop-php - Php language plugin for KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661833 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jrez...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 08:09:19 EST --- Name: ok Summary: ok Version/Release: ok Group: ok License: not ok! most files in the archive are LGPLv2+, some even GPLv3+ (does not look like intention as it's just header, even not properly filled!), try licensecheck - pls, contact upstream to clarify situation and to fix issues URL: ok Sources: md5sum ok (1f364430db7e8146fc2dee61a80417f4 kdevelop-php-1.1.1.tar.bz2, d93efbe0f4fa04070c27fd5a68152f95 kdevelop-php-docs-1.1.1.tar.bz2) BuildRequires/Requires: ok Description: ok Build/make: ok Looks ok but license and invalid-sonames. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 626122] Review Request: libqmf - Qt Messaging Framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626122 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jrez...@redhat.com --- Comment #9 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 08:13:01 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) We're trying to negotiate the qmf namespace clash with qpid-cpp maintainers (that package currently produces subpkgs named qmf and qmf-devel). https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661736 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 603346] Review Request: php-voms-admin - Web based interface to control VOMS parameters written in PHP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=603346 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 458714] Review Request: libkate - Libraries to handle the Kate bitstream format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=458714 --- Comment #22 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:40:49 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 490988] Review Request: libvdpau - Wrapper library for the Video Decode and Presentation 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=490988 --- Comment #18 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:41:33 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 461119] Review Request: libtiger - Rendering library for Kate streams using Pango and Cairo
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461119 --- Comment #13 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:41:10 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 522245] Review Request: vdpauinfo - Tool to query the capabilities of a VDPAU implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=522245 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:41:50 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 637877] Rename request: meego-panel-status - MeeGo Panel for Social Network Status
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=637877 --- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:42:20 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 223657] Review Request: PerceptualDiff - An image comparison utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=223657 --- Comment #33 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:40:08 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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 459549] Review Request: python-ethtool - bindings for the ethtool kernel interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459549 --- Comment #16 from David Sommerseth dav...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 09:39:54 EST --- Just to avoid confusion, dsommers is the maintainer of python-ethtool and is also the one sending this request to get python-ethtool into EPEL-5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 459549] Review Request: python-ethtool - bindings for the ethtool kernel interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459549 David Sommerseth dav...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||dav...@redhat.com --- Comment #15 from David Sommerseth dav...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 09:37:53 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-ethtool New Branches: el5 Owners: acme -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 660600] Rename Request: pcsc-lite-ccid - Generic USB CCID smart card reader driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=660600 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:46:11 EST --- I do not know if the branch utilities will keep the repository uninitialized as you request, but I doubt it. Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652576] Review Request: ghc-texmath - Haskell texmathml 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=652576 --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:44:25 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 659896] Review Request: cp2k - A molecular dynamics engine capable of classical and Car-Parrinello simulations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659896 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:44:40 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650717] Review Request: PolicyKit-olpc - OLPC-specific PolicyKit overrides
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650717 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:44:05 EST --- Unblocking packages from tags is not an SCM operation; I'm afraid I can't do what you are requesting. You probably need to file a ticket with release engineering: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650717] Review Request: PolicyKit-olpc - OLPC-specific PolicyKit overrides
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650717 --- Comment #9 from Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com 2010-12-10 09:49:51 EST --- Requested: https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/4296 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 243642] Review Request: schroedinger - Portable libraries for the high quality Dirac video codec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=243642 --- Comment #10 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2010-12-10 09:47:27 EST --- We need an ack from the primary maintainer here. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 459549] Review Request: python-ethtool - bindings for the ethtool kernel interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=459549 David Sommerseth dav...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 634909] Review Request: v8 - JavaScript 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=634909
--- Comment #17 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2010-12-10 10:33:25 EST ---
Thank you
(In reply to comment #15)
v8.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libv8-2.5.9.so e...@glibc_2.2.5
v8.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary d8
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
I suggest we can ignore these two errors, although even a minimal man page for
d8 would be nice to have.
I don't have resources to write the manual myself (I sort of hoped Debian would
create one; they're quite good at that ;) -- I don't know much about d8 myself
and nothing that would help me is included in the source. I guess this is best
left as it is.
rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/v8-devel-2.5.9-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm:
v8-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
v8-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/js2c.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
v8-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/jsmin.py 0644L /usr/bin/python2.4
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings.
I'm not mega worried about the lack of docs (although again, shipping the
samples/* code would be nice I think),
These probably are not of much use to most -devel package users; they are built
and used as part of the test use, but I don't think it's very wise or useful to
ship them with the package.
but the python stuff needs to be fixed
imho. Arguably the jsmin.py error isn't a problem, although I would much
rather
it not have a shebang unless it's actually an executable (esp. since most
Fedora won't have python2.4 around anyway).
Also, I'm not sure js2c.py really is a library - it looks like a utility to
me.
I don't think that is the right location for it.
Stripped the shebang from both, made a /usr/bin/js2c wrapper for js2c.py which
is supposed to be an user-called tool as well.
rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/v8-debuginfo-2.5.9-1.fc14.x86_64.rpm:
v8-debuginfo.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/src/debug/v8-2.5.9/src/compiler.cc
v8-debuginfo.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/src/debug/v8-2.5.9/src/scanner.cc
v8-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/v8-2.5.9/include/v8-debug.h
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings.
Various permissions errors here which should be fixed. The install -pm
approach
used in part of the specfile I think would be better - you could then lose the
chmods and it would look a bit tidier.
Fixed. Still had to use chmod for -debuginfo.
- if you're going to use %{} macros, %{buildroot} looks nicer than
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT rather than mixing the two styles
Well, the consistent use of macros guideline forbids mixing of %{buildroot}
with $RPM_BUILD_ROOT or %{optflags} with $RPM_OPT_FLAGS, which I don't do.
I believe that consistency with existing SPEC files is more important than
anything else here. Most packages use $RPM_BUILD_ROOT for build root (and
%{optflags} for compiler flags) and so do many tools that generate SPEC files
(e.g. cpanspec). I'm really accustomed to that, it makes the SPEC files more
legible to me and would like it to stay it that way (at least until a guideline
deals with this diversity).
- the .spec has some tabs and spaces mixed
/me looks down in shame
uh, okay, fixed.
- Packaging guildelines state use of ExcludeArch with appropriate BZ
references per-arch instead of ExclusiveArch.
A guideline is probably wrong here. In this case the package it's really not a
bug, given it is really specific to certain architectures those are only ones
v8 JIT compilers were written for.
SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SPECS/v8.spec
SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/SRPMS/v8-2.5.9-2.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 661436] Review Request: rubygem-heroku - deploy apps to Heroku
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661436 David Riches davi...@ultracar.co.uk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||davi...@ultracar.co.uk --- Comment #1 from David Riches davi...@ultracar.co.uk 2010-12-10 11:14:04 EST --- *not a sponsor*, just some quick feedback These packages really need to be separate bugzillas. License: GPLv2+ or Ruby - I think you should probably pick one Also, quickly checking the src.rpm, with rpm -qpl I get error: rubygem-heroku-1.14.8-1.fc14.src.rpm: not an rpm package (or package manifest) Perhaps you might want to check this url? Regards Dave -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 657591] Review Request: rubygem-isolate - Very simple RubyGems sandbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=657591 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-12-10 11:13:56 --- Comment #5 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10 11:13:56 EST --- Closing. Thank you for review and git procedure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 654862] Review Request: saphire - Yet another shell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=654862 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-12-10 11:13:19 --- Comment #7 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10 11:13:19 EST --- Closing. Thank you for the review and git procedure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 646611] Rename review: drupal-cck - drupal6-cck
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646611 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 646610] Rename review: drupal-views - drupal6-views
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646610 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653805] Review Request: drupal6-ctools - This suite is primarily a set of APIs and tools to improve the developer experience.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653805 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642858] Review Request: drupal6-footnotes - Allows to easily create automatically numbered footnote references
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642858 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642857] Review Request: drupal6-advanced-help - Allows module developers to store their help outside the module system in html
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642857 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 659005] Review Request: drupal6-job_scheduler - Simple API for scheduling tasks once at a predetermined time or periodically at a fixed interval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659005 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661436] Review Request: rubygem-heroku - deploy apps to Heroku
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661436 --- Comment #2 from Minnikhanov minnikha...@gmail.com 2010-12-10 11:43:06 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) Also, quickly checking the src.rpm, with rpm -qpl I get error: rubygem-heroku-1.14.8-1.fc14.src.rpm: not an rpm package (or package manifest) Perhaps you might want to check this url? I check github's url. Now I downloaded my srpm from github, check it by rpm -qpl ... - no error. http://fpaste.org/YSwu/ [...@lhost heroku]$ ls rubygem-heroku-1.14.6-1.fc14.src.rpm rubygem-launchy-0.3.7-1.fc14.src.rpm rubygem-heroku-1.14.8-1.fc14.src.rpm rubygem-launchy.spec rubygem-heroku.spec [...@lhost heroku]$ rpm -qpl rubygem-heroku-1.14.8-1.fc14.src.rpm heroku-1.14.8.gem rubygem-heroku.spec [...@lhost heroku]$ rpm -qpl rubygem-launchy-0.3.7-1.fc14.src.rpm launchy-0.3.7.gem rubygem-launchy.spec [...@lhost heroku]$ ^C Also check by rpmlint - no error. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661436] Review Request: rubygem-heroku - deploy apps to Heroku
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661436 --- Comment #3 from Minnikhanov minnikha...@gmail.com 2010-12-10 11:50:37 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) License: GPLv2+ or Ruby - I think you should probably pick one This generated by gem2rpm - I don't know which to pick. Will anybody advice - what License is right. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 243642] Review Request: schroedinger - Portable libraries for the high quality Dirac video codec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=243642 --- Comment #11 from Jeffrey C. Ollie j...@ocjtech.us 2010-12-10 12:07:45 EST --- +1 from me! -- 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 661832] Review Request: kdevelop-pg-qt - A parser generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661832 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2010-12-10 12:21:20 EST --- Re: licensing Using licensecheck (from kdesdk), $ find kdevelop-pg-qt-0.9.0/kdev-pg -print | xargs licensecheck | grep -v LGPL | sort | uniq ./kdev-pg-lexer.cc: *No copyright* GENERATED FILE ./kdev-pg-parser.cc: GPL ./kdev-pg-parser.hh: GPL ./test/test.sh: *No copyright* UNKNOWN Looks like kdev-pg-parser.* are generated from bison, and is really GPLv2+ indeed , ugh. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661833] Review Request: kdevelop-php - Php language plugin for KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661833
--- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2010-12-10 12:26:32 EST
---
indeed,
$ find . -print | grep -v test | xargs licensecheck | grep -v LGPL | sort |
uniq
./app_templates/simple_phpapp/%{APPNAME}.php: *No copyright* UNKNOWN
./parser/parsesession.cpp: GPL (v2 or later)
./parser/parsesession.h: GPL (v2 or later)
./phpfunctions.php: *No copyright* GENERATED FILE
./phphighlighting.cpp: GPL (v3 or later)
./phphighlighting.h: GPL (v3 or later)
./phplanguagesupport.cpp: GPL (v2 or later)
./phplanguagesupport.h: GPL (v2 or later)
./phpparsejob.cpp: GPL (v2 or later)
./phpparsejob.h: GPL (v2 or later)
looks like we can go with
License: GPLv2+
the libraries are not illegitimate, imo, rpmlint is just complaining about the
lack of (versioned) sonames.
Any other blockers?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653682] Review Request: jemalloc - General-purpose scalable concurrent malloc(3) implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653682 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||jemalloc-2.0.1-2.el5 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-10 12:29:20 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653682] Review Request: jemalloc - General-purpose scalable concurrent malloc(3) implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653682 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 12:29:15 EST --- jemalloc-2.0.1-2.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 661832] Review Request: kdevelop-pg-qt - A parser generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661832 --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2010-12-10 12:39:31 EST --- Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdevelop-php/kdevelop-pg-qt.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdevelop-php/kdevelop-pg-qt-0.9.0-2.fc13.src.rpm %changelog * Fri Dec 10 2010 Rex Dieter rdie...@fedoraproject.org - 0.9.0-2 - License: GPLv2+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661833] Review Request: kdevelop-php - Php language plugin for KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661833 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2010-12-10 12:40:22 EST --- Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdevelop-php/kdevelop-php.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdevelop-php/kdevelop-php-1.1.1-2.fc13.src.rpm %changelog * Fri Dec 10 2010 Rex Dieter rdie...@fedoraproject.org - 1.1.1-2 - License: GPLv2+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661436] Review Request: rubygem-heroku - deploy apps to Heroku
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661436
Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
--- Comment #4 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10
12:48:52 EST ---
Some notes:
* Unused macros
- The defined macro %ruby_sitelib is used nowhere.
- Please use the defined %geminstdir macro also in %files
* License
- The license is MIT
* source URL
- Please specify the full URL for Source0
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
* BuildRoot
- On Fedora BuildRoot line is no longer needed:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
* documents / -doc subpackage
- Please consider to split document files (which are not
needed on runtime) to -doc subpackage.
The following files/directories can be moved to -doc subpackage
--
%{gemdir}/doc/%{gemname}-%{version}/
%{geminstdir}/spec/
--
- Please mark %geminstdir/README.md as %doc correctly.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 627197] Review Request: bluedevil - Bluetooth stack for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627197 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2010-12-10 12:51:06 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624020] Review Request: libbluedevil - A Qt wrapper for bluez
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624020 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2010-12-10 12:51:46 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 627197] Review Request: bluedevil - Bluetooth stack for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627197 Bug 627197 depends on bug 624020, which changed state. Bug 624020 Summary: Review Request: libbluedevil - A Qt wrapper for bluez https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624020 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661833] Review Request: kdevelop-php - Php language plugin for KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661833 --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2010-12-10 13:10:05 EST --- Oops, missed, ./phphighlighting.cpp: GPL (v3 or later) ./phphighlighting.h: GPL (v3 or later) Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdevelop-php/kdevelop-php.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/kdevelop-php/kdevelop-php-1.1.1-3.fc13.src.rpm %changelog * Fri Dec 10 2010 Rex Dieter rdie...@fedoraproject.org - 1.1.1-3 - License: GPLv3+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650712] Review Request: xcm - X Color Management tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650712 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(kwiz...@gmail.com ||) --- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10 13:16:38 EST --- ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652403] Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build-rpm-based-os-plugin - Files required to build appliances based on RPMs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652403 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-12-10 13:20:00 --- Comment #15 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10 13:20:00 EST --- Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652412] Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build-local-delivery-plugin - BoxGrinder plugin delivering appliance to local filesystem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652412 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-12-10 13:17:57 --- Comment #11 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10 13:17:57 EST --- Closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652406] Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build-fedora-os-plugin - BoxGrinder files required to build appliances with Fedora OS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652406 Bug 652406 depends on bug 652400, which changed state. Bug 652400 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build - Creates appliances for various virtual environments https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652400 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Bug 652406 depends on bug 652403, which changed state. Bug 652403 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build-rpm-based-os-plugin - Files required to build appliances based on RPMs https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652403 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ON_QA |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 597681] Review Request: kupfer - A free software launcher
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597681 Bug 597681 depends on bug 593800, which changed state. Bug 593800 Summary: Review Request: python-keyring - keyring module for python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593800 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ON_QA |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 593800] Review Request: python-keyring - keyring module for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=593800 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-12-10 13:22:00 --- Comment #56 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10 13:22:00 EST --- Anyway once 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 661961] Review Request: kyotocabinet - A lightweight database 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=661961 Steve Milner smil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||smil...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|smil...@redhat.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 661961] Review Request: kyotocabinet - A lightweight database 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=661961 Steve Milner smil...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661833] Review Request: kdevelop-php - Php language plugin for KDevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661833 --- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2010-12-10 13:39:49 EST --- Folks on #kdevelop irc confirmed the intent is to be GPLv2+ , and will work to relicense those files for upcoming releases. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661832] Review Request: kdevelop-pg-qt - A parser generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661832 --- Comment #6 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2010-12-10 13:39:49 EST --- Posted query to kdevelop-devel mailing list asking for licensing clarification in the meantime. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 634909] Review Request: v8 - JavaScript 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=634909
--- Comment #18 from Alex Hudson (Fedora Address) fed...@alexhudson.com
2010-12-10 13:49:55 EST ---
Nice job Lubomir.
There's still a permissions problem in debuginfo:
$ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/v8-debuginfo-2.5.9-2.fc14.x86_64.rpm
v8-debuginfo.x86_64: W: spurious-executable-perm
/usr/src/debug/v8-2.5.9/include/v8-debug.h
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
Otherwise, the packages look very clean; I've done the full check against the
Guidelines and I can't see anything new that we haven't already got on the bug.
One minor comment/question: is there a reason you're pulling from trunk?
# U=http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/
# R=$(svn log $U |awk '/^r[0-9]* / {r=$1} /2\.5\.9/ {print r; exit}')
# svn export -$R $U v8-2.5.9
# tar czf v8-2.5.9.tar.gz v8-2.5.9
I would normally expect a tagged pull, e.g.
# svn export http://v8.googlecode.com/svn/tags/2.5.9/ v8-2.5.9
# tar czf v8-2.5.9.tar.gz v8-2.5.9
As well as losing $U and $R, I would think it would be more reliable for
finding the right source than trawling the svn log. If the tag is different to
what ends up on trunk (?!) that would be worth an extra comment I think.
There is another problem remaining:
- Packaging guildelines state use of ExcludeArch with appropriate BZ
references per-arch instead of ExclusiveArch.
Having thought about it, I'm inclined to agree with you. My understanding of
the guideline is that we should only list known-not-to-work arches so that if
some new arch comes along, we give it the benefit of the doubt until it's shown
also not to work.
However, in the case of v8 (which is really a JIT/compiler), that's not a
sensible approach: it's not going to magically support new arches without
significant upstream work.
But we're left with the problem that this guideline is a MUST:, and that this
problem is therefore considered to be a blocker. I will raise this on
fedora-devel-list as I think this is a problem for me as the reviewer, rather
than you as packager. However, if you wanted to change this to ExcludeArch in
the meantime for the purposes of passing the review, that would be ok too.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641018] Review Request: rubygem-nanoc3 - A web publishing system written in Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641018
--- Comment #9 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-10
14:04:54 EST ---
Sorry, it seems I have forgotton this review.
Then how about this issue?
(In reply to comment #2)
- And for the same reason, do filters of which the dependencies
are not found on Fedora really have to be removed?
The filter scripts don't seem to be loaded automatically.
That's correct. I will keep all those filters here.
So I think the lines like
--
51 rm -f %{buildroot}/%{geminstdir}/lib/nanoc3/filters/sass.rb
---
are not needed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661961] Review Request: kyotocabinet - A lightweight database 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=661961
--- Comment #1 from Steve Milner smil...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 14:03:33 EST
---
+ = good
- = bad
o = informational
+ 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 must meet the Packaging Guidelines (see rpmlint output and notes
on %doc)
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing
Guidelines (GPLv3)
+ The License field in the package spec matches the actual license (GPLv3)
- the file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be
included in %doc (%doc is not being used by this package. It should be updated
to use %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 matches the upstream source
$ md5sum kyotocabinet-1.2.27.tar.gz
kyotocabinet-1.2.27-1.fc14.src/kyotocabinet-1.2.27.tar.gz
01da76d5989b67f5b16cf48b170247ff kyotocabinet-1.2.27.tar.gz
01da76d5989b67f5b16cf48b170247ff
kyotocabinet-1.2.27-1.fc14.src/kyotocabinet-1.2.27.tar.gz
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture (x86)
? 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 are listed in BuildRequires
+ The spec file MUST handle locales properly. (no locales)
? 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 does NOT bundle copies of system libraries
+ If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this
fact in the request for review (not relocatable)
o a later version of the software was released
o %clean section is not required unless you will be building for EPEL and/or
F12 or lower.
o Consider if the the development documentation should be in a -doc package
instead of in the devel package due to the amount of files (222)
- rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces
(see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Beware_of_Rpath)
$ rpmlint
/usr/local/steve/rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/kyotocabinet-1.2.27-1.fc13.i686.rpm
/usr/local/steve/rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/kyotocabinet-devel-1.2.27-1.fc13.i686.rpm
/usr/local/steve/rpmbuild/RPMS/i686/kyotocabinet-debuginfo-1.2.27-1.fc13.i686.rpm
kyotocabinet-1.2.27-1.fc14.src.rpm
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcforestmgr
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcdirmgr ['/lib',
'/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib', '/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kchashmgr ['/lib',
'/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib', '/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcforesttest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcstashtest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kccachetest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kchashtest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kctreemgr ['/lib',
'/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib', '/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kclangctest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcutilmgr ['/lib',
'/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib', '/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcdirtest ['/lib',
'/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib', '/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcutiltest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcpolytest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath /usr/bin/kcprototest
['/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/lib', '/usr/local/steve/lib', '/usr/local/lib',
'/usr/lib']
kyotocabinet.i686: E:
[Bug 659005] Review Request: drupal6-job_scheduler - Simple API for scheduling tasks once at a predetermined time or periodically at a fixed interval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659005
Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||sticks...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com 2010-12-10 14:47:04
EST ---
[ O K ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/drupal6-job_scheduler.spec
rpmbuild/SRPMS/drupal6-job_scheduler-1.0-0.1.beta3.fc14.src.rpm
rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/drupal6-job_scheduler-1.0-0.1.beta3.fc14.noarch.rpm
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
NOTE: The Requires: as listed will not work in EPEL, but they are fine
in Fedora. To correct this issue, use Requires: drupal6 = 6.0
[ O K ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines.
[ O K ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[ O K ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[ O K ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
$ md5sum rpmbuild/SOURCES/job_scheduler-6.x-1.0-beta3.tar.gz
6ab6012d0ce0d2956a62d836e9b6e272
rpmbuild/SOURCES/job_scheduler-6.x-1.0-beta3.tar.gz
$ curl -s -o -
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/job_scheduler-6.x-1.0-beta3.tar.gz |
md5sum -
6ab6012d0ce0d2956a62d836e9b6e272 -
[ O K ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one primary architecture.
[ N/A ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[ O K ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[ N/A ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[ N/A ] MUST: Every binary RPM package (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.
[ O K ] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[ O K ] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[ O K ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does
not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which
does create that directory.
[ O K ] MUST: 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)
[ O K ] 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.
[ O K ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[ O K ] MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity).
[ O K ] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present.
[ N/A ] MUST:
[Bug 661902] Review Request: moksha - A platform for creating real-time web applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661902 --- Comment #3 from Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 15:15:14 EST --- With regard to the SELinux stuff in %post, I asked dwalsh about it a while ago, and he said that was fine. I'll run it by him again. I'll file a ticket upstream to write up some man pages. As for testing the package, the entire test suite runs in %check, but I'll figure out and document the easiest way to get things running locally after it is installed. Spec URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/moksha.spec SRPM URL: http://lmacken.fedorapeople.org/rpms/moksha-0.5.0-2.fc14.src.rpm * Fri Dec 10 2010 Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com - 0.5.0-2 - Fix our Source URL - Fix files-attr-not-set rpmlint errors - Fix up the description - Remove redundant license -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630260] Review Request: ghc-attoparsec - Fast combinator parsing for bytestrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630260 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:26:08 EST --- ghc-attoparsec-0.8.2.0-1.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 648244] Review Request: ghc-base64-bytestring - Fast base64 encoding and deconding for ByteStrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648244 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-base64-bytestring-0.1.0 ||.1-2.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-10 15:24:37 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630260] Review Request: ghc-attoparsec - Fast combinator parsing for bytestrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630260 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||ghc-attoparsec-0.8.2.0-1.fc ||13 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-10 15:26:13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653682] Review Request: jemalloc - General-purpose scalable concurrent malloc(3) implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653682 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:26:37 EST --- jemalloc-2.0.1-2.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 648244] Review Request: ghc-base64-bytestring - Fast base64 encoding and deconding for ByteStrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648244 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:24:32 EST --- ghc-base64-bytestring-0.1.0.1-2.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 653682] Review Request: jemalloc - General-purpose scalable concurrent malloc(3) implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653682 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|jemalloc-2.0.1-2.el5|jemalloc-2.0.1-2.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 630260] Review Request: ghc-attoparsec - Fast combinator parsing for bytestrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630260 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:32:17 EST --- ghc-attoparsec-0.8.2.0-1.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 654848] Review Request: apvlv - PDF viewer which behaves like Vim
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=654848 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:34:12 EST --- apvlv-0.0.9.8-1.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 659005] Review Request: drupal6-job_scheduler - Simple API for scheduling tasks once at a predetermined time or periodically at a fixed interval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659005 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sticks...@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 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|emacs-slime-3.0-0.1.2010111 |emacs-slime-3.0-0.1.2010111 |3cvs.fc14 |3cvs.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 630260] Review Request: ghc-attoparsec - Fast combinator parsing for bytestrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630260 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-attoparsec-0.8.2.0-1.fc |ghc-attoparsec-0.8.2.0-1.fc |13 |14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653682] Review Request: jemalloc - General-purpose scalable concurrent malloc(3) implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653682 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:33:09 EST --- jemalloc-2.0.1-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661832] Review Request: kdevelop-pg-qt - A parser generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661832 --- Comment #8 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org 2010-12-10 15:35:10 EST --- This is the full text of the exception: /* As a special exception, you may create a larger work that contains part or all of the Bison parser skeleton and distribute that work under terms of your choice, so long as that work isn't itself a parser generator using the skeleton or a modified version thereof as a parser skeleton. Alternatively, if you modify or redistribute the parser skeleton itself, you may (at your option) remove this special exception, which will cause the skeleton and the resulting Bison output files to be licensed under the GNU General Public License without this special exception. This special exception was added by the Free Software Foundation in version 2.2 of Bison. */ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661832] Review Request: kdevelop-pg-qt - A parser generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661832 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org --- Comment #7 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org 2010-12-10 15:32:34 EST --- Bison-generated code has an exception so the Bison output can be used by programs under any license, look at the license header carefully. So this is really: License: LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+ with exceptions and can be used in a very similar way to code which is just LGPLv2+ (but the licenses are technically not convertible one to the other, just linkable together or convertible to GPLv2+, so I think you should list both). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648244] Review Request: ghc-base64-bytestring - Fast base64 encoding and deconding for ByteStrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648244 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|ghc-base64-bytestring-0.1.0 |ghc-base64-bytestring-0.1.0 |.1-2.fc14 |.1-2.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 654848] Review Request: apvlv - PDF viewer which behaves like Vim
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=654848 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||apvlv-0.0.9.8-1.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-10 15:34:16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648244] Review Request: ghc-base64-bytestring - Fast base64 encoding and deconding for ByteStrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648244 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:32:56 EST --- ghc-base64-bytestring-0.1.0.1-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:34:24 EST --- emacs-slime-3.0-0.1.20101113cvs.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 653682] Review Request: jemalloc - General-purpose scalable concurrent malloc(3) implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653682 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|jemalloc-2.0.1-2.fc14 |jemalloc-2.0.1-2.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 641690] Review Request: k4dirstat - Graphical Directory Statistics for Used Disk Space
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641690 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:32:05 EST --- k4dirstat-2.7.0-0.4.20101010git6c0a9e6.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 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 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 15:29:17 EST --- emacs-slime-3.0-0.1.20101113cvs.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 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||emacs-slime-3.0-0.1.2010111 ||3cvs.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-10 15:29:22 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641690] Review Request: k4dirstat - Graphical Directory Statistics for Used Disk Space
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641690 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||k4dirstat-2.7.0-0.4.2010101 ||0git6c0a9e6.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 634909] Review Request: v8 - JavaScript 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=634909 --- Comment #19 from Alex Hudson (Fedora Address) fed...@alexhudson.com 2010-12-10 15:28:03 EST --- Ok, consensus (so far) in this case is that we can ignore the Guidelines on ExcludeArch:, so you can keep the ExclusiveArch as it is I think: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2010-December/147023.html So the only outstanding problem left is the permissions of the .h file in -debuginfo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653805] Review Request: drupal6-ctools - This suite is primarily a set of APIs and tools to improve the developer experience.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653805 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sticks...@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 653805] Review Request: drupal6-ctools - This suite is primarily a set of APIs and tools to improve the developer experience.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653805 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||sticks...@gmail.com Flag||needinfo?(peter.bo...@gmail ||.com) --- Comment #12 from Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com 2010-12-10 15:59:05 EST --- I don't see how your rpmlint output came out the way it did. $ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/drupal6-ctools.spec rpmbuild/SRPMS/drupal6-ctools-1.8-1.fc14.src.rpm rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/drupal6-ctools-1.8-1.fc14.noarch.rpm drupal6-ctools.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.8 ['1.8-1.fc14', '1.8-1'] drupal6-ctools.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/drupal/modules/ctools/stylizer/help/base-styles.html drupal6-ctools.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/drupal/modules/ctools/views_content/views_content.admin.inc drupal6-ctools.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/drupal/modules/ctools/stylizer/help/stylizer.help.ini drupal6-ctools.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/drupal/modules/ctools/plugins/access/node.inc drupal6-ctools.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/share/drupal/modules/ctools/stylizer/help/base-style-types.html 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 1 warnings. * Please correct the version in your %changelog entry. I recommend using an rpm spec-aware editor's built-in functions when you're editing spec files (I think vim does this well, I know Emacs does). * Are these zero-length files required, or will ctools work without them? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642857] Review Request: drupal6-advanced-help - Allows module developers to store their help outside the module system in html
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642857
Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||sticks...@gmail.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sticks...@gmail.com
Flag||needinfo?(s...@lank.es)
--- Comment #3 from Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com 2010-12-10 16:12:21
EST ---
[ O K ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
$ rpmlint rpmbuild/SPECS/drupal6-advanced-help.spec
rpmbuild/SRPMS/drupal6-advanced-help-1.2-1.fc14.src.rpm
rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/drupal6-advanced-help-1.2-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
drupal6-advanced-help.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) html - HTML, ht
ml, ht-ml
drupal6-advanced-help.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -
HTML, ht ml, ht-ml
drupal6-advanced-help.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) html - HTML, ht
ml, ht-ml
drupal6-advanced-help.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US html -
HTML, ht ml, ht-ml
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
Please post verbatim for other reviews, thanks!
[ O K ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
NOTE: The Requires: as listed will not work in EPEL, but they are fine
in Fedora. To correct this issue, use Requires: drupal6 = 6.0
[ O K ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines.
[ O K ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[ O K ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[ O K ] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[ O K ] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
If no upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
$ md5sum rpmbuild/SOURCES/advanced_help-6.x-1.2.tar.gz ; curl -s -o -
http://ftp.drupal.org/files/projects/advanced_help-6.x-1.2.tar.gz | md5sum -
a41a31032c907409ab5c330260c66fe8 rpmbuild/SOURCES/advanced_help-6.x-1.2.tar.gz
a41a31032c907409ab5c330260c66fe8 -
[ O K ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one primary architecture.
[ N/A ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
[ O K ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
[ N/A ] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
[ N/A ] MUST: Every binary RPM package (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.
[ O K ] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[ O K ] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must
state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
[ O K ] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does
not create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which
does create that directory.
[ O K ] MUST: 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)
[ O K ] 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.
[ O K ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[ O K ] MUST: The package must contain
[Bug 642857] Review Request: drupal6-advanced-help - Allows module developers to store their help outside the module system in html
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642857 Paul W. Frields sticks...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661902] Review Request: moksha - A platform for creating real-time web applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661902
--- Comment #4 from Casey Dahlin cdah...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 17:39:56 EST
---
Actually remembered to run the lint tool on the output this time.
moksha.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jQuery - j Query,
query, equerry
Ignore
moksha.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/widgets/blueprint/static/src/print.css
moksha.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/widgets/blueprint/static/src/grid.css
moksha.noarch: E: wrong-script-end-of-line-encoding
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/widgets/blueprint/static/src/grid.css
moksha.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/widgets/blueprint/static/plugins/sprites/sprite.css
These are being installed with +x. Fix please.
moksha.noarch: E: non-executable-script
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/commands/cli.py 0644L /usr/bin/env
I think ignore... looks like it found a shebang in it? Should that be there?
moksha.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/api/widgets/buttons/static/images/orange/.DS_Store
NO! This needs fixing
moksha.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/moksha 0700L
Is this necessary? If so carry on.
moksha.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/widgets/blueprint/static/src/reset.css
Another css file with +x.
moksha.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/moksha/api/widgets/buttons/static/images/default/.DS_Store
Again. No friggin way.
moksha.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary moksha-hub
moksha.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary moksha
Knew about these.
moksha.noarch: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-postin /etc/init.d/moksha-hub
moksha.noarch: E: init-script-without-chkconfig-preun /etc/init.d/moksha-hub
Probably a good idea to fix.
moksha.noarch: E: no-chkconfig-line /etc/init.d/moksha-hub
Do fix this one.
moksha.noarch: W: incoherent-init-script-name moksha-hub ('moksha', 'mokshad')
Ignore (God there's some stupid checks in lint these days).
moksha.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US jQuery - j Query, query,
equerry
Ignore
moksha-docs.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
/usr/share/doc/moksha-docs-0.5.0/html/.buildinfo
What is this?
moksha-server.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) wsgi - swig, wigs
moksha-server.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C mod_wsgi Moksha server
moksha-server.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wsgi - swig,
wigs
moksha-server.noarch: W: no-documentation
Ugh. Ignore all of these.
moksha-server.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/httpd/conf.d/moksha.conf
moksha-server.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /etc/httpd/conf.d/moksha.conf
moksha-server.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/moksha/production/rabbitmq/rabbitmq-codegen-amqp-codegen.patch
moksha-server.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/moksha/production/sample-production.ini
More extraneous +x bits.
moksha-server.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/moksha 0700L
Again please inform me if this is necessary.
moksha-server.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/moksha/production/apache/moksha.conf
moksha-server.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/moksha/production/nginx/moksha.conf
moksha-server.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/moksha/production/apache/moksha.wsgi
moksha-server.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/moksha/production/orbited.cfg
And more useless +x bits.
On another note:
yum list | sed 's/\..*//' | grep -e '-docs\?$' | awk -F- '{ print $NF }' | sort
| uniq -c
Yields:
443 doc
102 docs
So renaming the -docs package to -doc would make me personally happy. OCD is
delicious.
Looks like the rest of the old stuff is fixed though.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661961] Review Request: kyotocabinet - A lightweight database 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=661961
--- Comment #2 from Casey Dahlin cdah...@redhat.com 2010-12-10 18:35:38 EST
---
From http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/CreatingPackageHowTo
There is a potential 'gotcha' with %doc entries: if you have a %doc entry, then
you can't use commands during %install to copy files into the documentation
directory descending from %_defaultdocdir. That's because if there's a %doc
entry, rpmbuild will automatically remove the docdir files created by %install
before installing the files listed with %doc. This can hit you if, for example,
you want an examples subdirectory in the documentation directory. In this
case, don't use %doc to mark documentation. Instead, create the directories
and copy the files into %{buildroot}%{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-%{version}/
during %install, and make sure that %files includes an entry for
%{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-%{version}/. They will still be correctly marked as
documentation.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630283] Review Request: ghc-neither - Either with monad and applicative instances
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630283 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 20:45:21 EST --- ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.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 630283] Review Request: ghc-neither - Either with monad and applicative instances
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630283 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-10 20:45:28 EST --- ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-failure-0.1.0.1-1.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 225776] Merge Review: gamin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225776 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|NEW AssignedTo|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro|nob...@fedoraproject.org -- 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 520204] Review Request: aspell-ro - Romanian dictionary for Aspell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520204 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro|nob...@fedoraproject.org QAContact|wo...@nobugconsulting.ro|extras...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #4 from manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro 2010-12-10 21:06:24 EST --- I am giving up the revue due to lack of response from the submitter and lack of time from myself -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 520204] Review Request: aspell-ro - Romanian dictionary for Aspell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=520204 manuel wolfshant wo...@nobugconsulting.ro changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662255] Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen - Framework to create code generators that operate on XML descriptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662255 Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||662249 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662249] Review Request: php-pear-Console-Getopt - Command line option parser implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662249 Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662255 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662255] New: Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen - Framework to create code generators that operate on XML descriptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen - Framework to create code generators that operate on XML descriptions https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662255 Summary: Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen - Framework to create code generators that operate on XML descriptions Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/php-pear-CodeGen.spec SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/php-pear-CodeGen-1.0.7-1.src.rpm Description: Provides the base framework to create code generators that operate on XML descriptions like CodeGen_PECL and CodeGen_MySqlUDF. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662257] New: Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen-PECL - Tool to generate PECL extensions from an XML description
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen-PECL - Tool to generate PECL extensions from an XML description https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662257 Summary: Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen-PECL - Tool to generate PECL extensions from an XML description Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/php-pear-CodeGen-PECL.spec SRPM URL: http://labs.linuxnetz.de/bugzilla/php-pear-CodeGen-PECL-1.1.3-1.src.rpm Description: CodeGen_PECL (formerly known as PECL_Gen) is a pure PHP replacement for the ext_skel shell script that comes with the PHP 4 source. It reads in configuration options, function prototypes and code fragments from an XML description file and then generates a complete ready-to-compile PECL extension. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662255] Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen - Framework to create code generators that operate on XML descriptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662255 Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662257 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662257] Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen-PECL - Tool to generate PECL extensions from an XML description
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662257 Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||662255 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 662255] Review Request: php-pear-CodeGen - Framework to create code generators that operate on XML descriptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=662255 --- Comment #1 from Robert Scheck redhat-bugzi...@linuxnetz.de 2010-12-10 21:30:52 EST --- Somehow, the RPM dependency to php-pear(Console_Getopt) doesn't work, but why? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 634037] Review Request: ghc-MissingH - Large utility 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=634037 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
