[Bug 663244] Review Request: CUnit - A unit testing framework for C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663244 --- Comment #4 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-12-25 08:50:55 EST --- --- | Why set --datarootdir at all? \-- Without it in doc/Makefile, you get: docdir = $(prefix)/doc/CUnit prefix = /usr and doc gets installed in /usr/doc/CUnit which is not what we want. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664298] Review Request: autojump - A fast way to navigate your filesystem from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664298 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 19:26:29 EST --- autojump-14-2.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update autojump'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/autojump-14-2.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 642856] Review Request: drupal6-flexifilter - Allows non-admins to create their own, configurable custom filters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642856 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 12:25:49 EST --- drupal6-flexifilter-1.2-2.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 664815] Review Request: perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI - PSGI adapter for CGI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664815
Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr
2010-12-24 04:51:41 EST ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2687618
[x] Rpmlint output:
perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backends -
backbends, back ends, back-ends
perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backends -
backbends, back ends, back-ends
perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backends
- backbends, back ends, back-ends
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
9a2042692cb410cb7d8b094094d139d9 CGI-Emulate-PSGI-0.10.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86-64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2687618
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[?] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
All tests successful.
Files=5, Tests=24, 1 wallclock secs ( 0.06 usr 0.02 sys + 0.68 cusr 0.11
csys = 0.87 CPU)
Result: PASS
APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661143] Review Request: votca-tools - VOTCA tools 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=661143 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|votca-csg-1.0.1-2.fc14 |votca-csg-1.0.1-2.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 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 #34 from Minnikhanov minnikha...@gmail.com 2010-12-24 13:17:13 EST --- heroku-1.15.1 22/12/2010 Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-heroku.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-heroku-1.15.1-1.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661154] Review Request: votca-csg - VOTCA coarse graining 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=661154 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 19:27:48 EST --- votca-csg-1.0.1-2.fc13, votca-tools-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 662949] Review Request: freedups - Hard-links identical files to save 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=662949
Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
--- Comment #1 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2010-12-25 04:21:53
EST ---
Brief look at the spec file only (no full review):
It is likely that some of these issues are reported by rpmlint, too, so please
run rpmlint on the src.rpm package and the built rpms.
%define name freedups
%define version 0.6.14
%define release 1%{?dist}
Name: %{name}
Version: %{version}
Release: %{release}
Why the extra redefinition? Name: defines %name, Version: defines %version,
and Release: defines %release already. It's sufficient to just write:
Name: freedups
Version: 0.6.14
Release: 1%{?dist}
License: GPL
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#GPL_and_LGPL
plus
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification
since the license text is not included, and all that's there is the brief
comment (from 2002?) that GPL is used. It cannot be assumed that it is
GPLv2+.
BuildRoot:%{_tmppath}/%{name}--buildroot
Note that several details related to the BuildRoot are not needed anymore since
Fedora 13:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean
install -m755 %{name}.pl $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_bindir}/%{name}
Typically, option -p is used for install or cp to preserve timestamps. Less
useful for files which change often, but added value for old files, so one can
quickly notice the age of a file (e.g. ancient 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 652257] Review Request: focuswriter - A fullscreen, distraction-free writing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652257 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 17:45:58 EST --- focuswriter-1.3.1-3.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/focuswriter-1.3.1-3.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661154] Review Request: votca-csg - VOTCA coarse graining 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=661154 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||votca-csg-1.0.1-2.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-24 19:27:18 Bug 661154 depends on bug 661143, which changed state. Bug 661143 Summary: Review Request: votca-tools - VOTCA tools library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661143 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA 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 665544] New: Review Request: ini4j - Java API for handling files in Window .ini format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ini4j - Java API for handling files in Window .ini format https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665544 Summary: Review Request: ini4j - Java API for handling files in Window .ini format Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: oma...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Spec URL: http://omajid.fedorapeople.org/ini4j/ini4j.spec SRPM URL: http://omajid.fedorapeople.org/ini4j/ini4j-0.4.1-3.fc15.src.rpm Description: ini4j is a simple Java API for handling configuration files in Windows .ini format. Additionally, the library includes Java preferences API implementation based on the .ini file The ini4j package was orphaned a while back, and the last update to the spec file was more than a year ago. I have taken over the package. According to the OrphanedPackages[1] page, I need a package review before I can update the package. I have tested this package by installing it on F13. Netbeans, which is the only package that requires ini4j, works just fine. [1]http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/OrphanedPackages -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664298] Review Request: autojump - A fast way to navigate your filesystem from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664298 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
[Bug 530047] Review Request: mingw32-tk - MinGW Windows graphical toolkit for the Tcl scripting language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530047 Paulo Roma Cavalcanti pro...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed|2010-12-17 12:50:29 |2010-12-24 11:51:34 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #32 from Minnikhanov minnikha...@gmail.com 2010-12-24 09:28:19 EST --- heroku.gem have Runtime Dependencies = launchy ~ 0.3.2 Now my template generate Requires: rubygem(launchy) = 0.3.2 Is need to generate 2 Requires? Sample: Requires: rubygem(launchy) = 0.3.2 Requires: rubygem(launchy) 0.4 Common algorithm: versions = a.b.c.d versions =~ /\d+(\.\d*)*/ 1. Runtime Dependencies = GEM ~ a.b.c.d generate: Requires: rubygem(GEM) = a.b.c.d Requires: rubygem(GEM) a.b.c+1 2. Runtime Dependencies = GEM ~ a.b.c. generate: Requires: rubygem(GEM) = a.b.c - is need here last dot (a.b.c.) Requires: rubygem(GEM) a.b.c+1 3. Runtime Dependencies = GEM ~ a. Runtime Dependencies = GEM ~ a generate: Requires: rubygem(GEM) = a - is need here last dot (a.) Requires: rubygem(GEM) a+1 4. Runtime Dependencies = GEM ~ generate: Requires: rubygem(GEM) = 0 Requires: rubygem(GEM) 1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650181] Review Request: tkabber-plugins - Additional plugins for tkabber
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650181 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
[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 #33 from Minnikhanov minnikha...@gmail.com 2010-12-24 09:38:00
EST ---
heroku.gem have spec/ folder.
Is need to realize %check section?
Like that
#%check
#pushd %{buildroot}/%{geminstdir}
#%_bindir/spec spec
#popd
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664904] Review Request: perl-Authen-Simple-Passwd - Simple Passwd authentication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664904 Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr 2010-12-24 04:52:41 EST --- Taking. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642856] Review Request: drupal6-flexifilter - Allows non-admins to create their own, configurable custom filters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642856 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||drupal6-flexifilter-1.2-2.e ||l5 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-24 12:25:55 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648098] Review Request: ghc-zlib-bindings - Low-level bindings to the zlib package
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648098
Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2010-12-25
05:11:50 EST ---
[+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
rpmlint -i ghc-zlib-bindings*.rpm ghc-zlib-bindings.spec
ghc-zlib-bindings.src: W: strange-permission zlib-bindings-0.0.0.tar.gz 0640L
A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions.
Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions.
ghc-zlib-bindings.src: W: strange-permission ghc-zlib-bindings.spec 0640L
A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions.
Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions.
ghc-zlib-bindings-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-zlib-bindings-devel
Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package
itself.
ghc-zlib-bindings-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
ghc-zlib-bindings-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/zlib-bindings-0.0.0/libHSzlib-bindings-0.0.0_p.a
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
[+]MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+]MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[+]MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
Naming-Yes
Version-release - Matches
License - OK BSD 2 clause variant
No prebuilt external bits - OK
Spec legibity - OK
Package template - OK
Arch support - OK
Libexecdir - OK
rpmlint - yes
changelogs - OK
Source url tag - OK, validated.
Buildroot is ignored - present anyway. OK
%clean is ignored - present anyway. OK
Build Requires list - OK
Summary and description - OK
API documentation - OK, present in devel package
[+]MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
BSD 2 clause license
[+]MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+]MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
LICENSE file included in base package
[+]MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+]MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+]MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source,as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
md5sum ghc-zlib-bindings-0.0.0-1.fc14.src/zlib-bindings-0.0.0.tar.gz
ced9be9c31f54ad848f58babf1ca2190
ghc-zlib-bindings-0.0.0-1.fc14.src/zlib-bindings-0.0.0.tar.gz
md5sum ~/Downloads/zlib-bindings-0.0.0.tar.gz
ced9be9c31f54ad848f58babf1ca2190 ~/Downloads/zlib-bindings-0.0.0.tar.gz
[+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Built on x86_64 . http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2688801
[+]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.
[+]MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[NA]MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly using the %find_lang macro
[NA]MUST: Packages stores shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun.
[+]MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
Checked with rpmquery --list
[NA]MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review.
[+]MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
Checked with rpmquery --whatprovides
[+]MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[+]MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
Checked with ls -lR
[+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+]MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[+]MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[NA]MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA]MUST: If a package contains
[Bug 656082] Review Request: libcprops - library of C prototyping functions, mostly searching
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656082 Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org --- Comment #8 from Paul Howarth p...@city-fan.org 2010-12-24 05:45:08 EST --- The BuildRequires is OK but the explicit Require is redundant as there should be automatically-added dependencies on the postgresql library sonames in the built binary packages. Moreover, those dependencies will be satisfied by the postgresql-libs package rather than the main postgresql package. So unless there's some reason why the main postgresql package should be pulled in as a runtime dependency when built with postgres support, the explicit Require is wrong. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652257] Review Request: focuswriter - A fullscreen, distraction-free writing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652257 --- Comment #9 from Jean-Francois Saucier jsauc...@gmail.com 2010-12-24 14:57:11 EST --- I just tested the new package on F-14 x86_64 with KDE desktop with no problem. However, I don't have a F-13 KDE desktop to test. What I propose is to push the package to bodhi and see what feedback we can get. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661154] Review Request: votca-csg - VOTCA coarse graining 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=661154 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 19:27:06 EST --- votca-csg-1.0.1-2.fc14, votca-tools-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 652257] Review Request: focuswriter - A fullscreen, distraction-free writing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652257 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
[Bug 650181] Review Request: tkabber-plugins - Additional plugins for tkabber
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650181 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 07:33:59 EST --- tkabber-plugins-0.11.1-3.svn1948.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tkabber-plugins-0.11.1-3.svn1948.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 652573] Review Request: ghc-zip-archive - Haskell zip-archive 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=652573 --- Comment #10 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2010-12-25 03:01:58 EST --- Works for me with rawhide ghc certainly. I suspect some local problem on your machine perhaps. But I can test F14 too later. I created another non administrative user and tried to compile the file. It worked properly. I am guessing there is some issue with the set of packages I have installed via cabal using my regular account. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 529181] Review Request: nautilus-flickr-uploader - Simple GUI to upload pics to Flickr
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=529181 Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC|linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de | 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 592487] Review Request: ffgtk - A solution for controlling Fritz!Box or compatible routers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592487 Louis Lagendijk lo...@lagendijk.xs4all.nl changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|BuildFails | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 560787] Review Request: python-mtTkinter - A thread-safe version of Tkinter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560787 Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW CC|linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de | AssignedTo|linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de |nob...@fedoraproject.org -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 660393] Review Request: netxen-firmware - QLogic Linux Intelligent Ethernet (3000 and 3100 Series) Adapter Firmware
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=660393 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2010-12-24 04:44:39 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) Thanks Peter. New package with the two issue resolved is here: New SRPM: http://www.auroralinux.org/people/spot/review/new/netxen-firmware-4.0.534-3.fc14.src.rpm Wrong link to the src.rpm (you uploaded noarch.rpm by mistake). However I see that you added udev as the Requires, so (assuming that you also added original license) I can't see any other issues. This package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652257] Review Request: focuswriter - A fullscreen, distraction-free writing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652257 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 17:46:48 EST --- focuswriter-1.3.1-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/focuswriter-1.3.1-3.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 567094] Review Request: mumble - Voice chat suite aimed at gamers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=567094 Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED CC|linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de | Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-12-25 10:19:52 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630274] Review Request: ghc-blaze-builder - Builder to efficiently append text
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630274
Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2010-12-25
06:14:01 EST ---
[+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
rpmlint -i *.rpm ghc-blaze-builder.spec
ghc-blaze-builder.src: W: strange-permission blaze-builder-0.1.tar.gz 0640L
A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions.
Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions.
ghc-blaze-builder.src: W: strange-permission ghc-blaze-builder.spec 0640L
A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions.
Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions.
ghc-blaze-builder-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-blaze-builder-devel
Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package
itself.
ghc-blaze-builder-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
ghc-blaze-builder-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/blaze-builder-0.1/libHSblaze-builder-0.1_p.a
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
[+]MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+]MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[+]MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
Naming-Yes
Version-release - Matches
License - OK, BSD 3 clause variant
No prebuilt external bits - OK
Spec legibity - OK
Package template - OK
Arch support - OK
Libexecdir - OK
rpmlint - yes
changelogs - OK
Source url tag - OK, validated.
Buildroot is ignored - present anyway. OK
%clean is ignored - present anyway. OK
Build Requires list - OK
Summary and description - OK
API documentation - OK
[+]MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[+]MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+]MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
LICENSE file included as part of base package. BSD 3 clause license.
[+]MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+]MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+]MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source,as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
md5sum ghc-blaze-builder-0.1-1.fc14.src/blaze-builder-0.1.tar.gz
6a65908b9a768c6fa3ab3d2569d3a214
ghc-blaze-builder-0.1-1.fc14.src/blaze-builder-0.1.tar.gz
md5sum ~/Downloads/blaze-builder-0.1.tar.gz
6a65908b9a768c6fa3ab3d2569d3a214 ~/Downloads/blaze-builder-0.1.tar.gz
[+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Built on x86_64. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2688806
[+]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.
[+]MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[NA]MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly using the %find_lang macro
[NA]MUST: Packages stores shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun.
[+]MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
Checked with rpmquery --list
[NA]MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review.
[+]MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
Checked with rpmquery --whatprovides
[+]MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[+]MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
Checked with ls -lR
[+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+]MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
[+]MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[NA]MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[NA]MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix
(e.g.libfoo.so.1.1),
[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 #35 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-12-25
11:44:42 EST ---
Well,
(In reply to comment #32)
heroku.gem have Runtime Dependencies = launchy ~ 0.3.2
Now my template generate
Requires: rubygem(launchy) = 0.3.2
Is need to generate 2 Requires?
Sample:
Requires: rubygem(launchy) = 0.3.2
Requires: rubygem(launchy) 0.4
- Usually we write Requires: rubygem(launchy) = 0.3.2 part
only, however technically writing also
Requires: rubygem(launchy) 0.4 is not wrong (according to
rubygem's dependency format).
I asked on fedora-packaging mailing list how people think about
writing both Requires (especially for writing lower Requires):
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2010-November/007501.html
... and got no answer, so for now I think that you can write
Requires: rubygem(launchy) 0.4 also _if you want_.
(In reply to comment #33)
heroku.gem have spec/ folder.
Is need to realize %check section?
Like that
#%check
#pushd %{buildroot}/%{geminstdir}
#%_bindir/spec spec
#popd
- Yes, it is preferable, however for this gem $ spec spec/
needs webmock gem, which is not in Fedora and currently review
request for rubygem-webmock does not exist either (once
existed but it was closed unfinished: bug 588477)
If you use rubygem-webmock you can package the srpm for Fedora.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664815] Review Request: perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI - PSGI adapter for CGI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664815 Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|emmanuel.sey...@club-intern ||et.fr Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr 2010-12-24 04:36:17 EST --- Taking. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665560] New: Review Request: rubygem-mail - A Really Ruby Mail Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-mail - A Really Ruby Mail Library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665560 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-mail - A Really Ruby Mail Library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: minnikha...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-mail.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-mail-2.2.13-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Hi. I just finished packaging up rubygem-mail, and I would appreciate a review so that I can get it into Fedora Extras. https://rubygems.org/gems/mail - A Really Ruby Mail Library. Packed for rails 3.0.x in F15 in Ruby SIG mailing list http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2010-December/000376.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661143] Review Request: votca-tools - VOTCA tools 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=661143 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 19:27:01 EST --- votca-csg-1.0.1-2.fc14, votca-tools-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 665560] Review Request: rubygem-mail - A Really Ruby Mail 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=665560 Minnikhanov minnikha...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||minnikha...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Minnikhanov minnikha...@gmail.com 2010-12-24 13:18:26 EST --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2688270 koji scratch build successful. 1st Review Request (Bug #661436): rubygem-heroku - deploy apps to Heroku . -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650181] Review Request: tkabber-plugins - Additional plugins for tkabber
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650181 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 19:22:14 EST --- tkabber-plugins-0.11.1-3.svn1948.fc13 has been pushed to the Fedora 13 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update tkabber-plugins'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tkabber-plugins-0.11.1-3.svn1948.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 652573] Review Request: ghc-zip-archive - Haskell zip-archive 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=652573
Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #11 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2010-12-25
04:19:27 EST ---
Here is my review. I did a ghc-pkg recache --user and that fixed the issue. The
test program compiles and runs fine.
[+]MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in
the review.
ghc-zip-archive.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell - Gaskell,
Gaitskell, Skellum
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
ghc-zip-archive.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell - Gaskell,
Gaitskell, Skellum
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
ghc-zip-archive-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Haskell -
Gaskell, Gaitskell, Skellum
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
ghc-zip-archive-prof.x86_64: E: devel-dependency ghc-zip-archive-devel
Your package has a dependency on a devel package but it's not a devel package
itself.
ghc-zip-archive-prof.x86_64: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
ghc-zip-archive-prof.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib64/ghc-6.12.3/zip-archive-0.1.1.6/libHSzip-archive-0.1.1.6_p.a
A development file (usually source code) is located in a non-devel package. If
you want to include source code in your package, be sure to create a
development package.
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 5 warnings.
[+]MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+]MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec
[+]MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
Naming-Yes, only building the library not the executable
Version-release - Matches
License - OK, included COPYING into the base package.
No prebuilt external bits - OK
Spec legibity - OK
Package template - OK
Arch support - OK
Libexecdir - OK
rpmlint - yes
changelogs - OK
Source url tag - OK, validated.
BuildRoot is ignored - OK
%clean is ignored - OK
Build Requires list - OK
Summary and description - OK
API documentation - OK, in devel package
[+]MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
[+]MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[+]MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
Included LICENSE and COPYING file
[+]MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+]MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[+]MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source,as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task.
md5sum ghc-zip-archive-0.1.1.6-4.fc14.src/zip-archive-0.1.1.6.tar.gz
4806077be79ecb5486306432ee93e38d
ghc-zip-archive-0.1.1.6-4.fc14.src/zip-archive-0.1.1.6.tar.gz
md5sum ~/Downloads/zip-archive-0.1.1.6.tar.gz
4806077be79ecb5486306432ee93e38d ~/Downloads/zip-archive-0.1.1.6.tar.gz
[+]MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
Built on x86_64 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2688795
[+]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.
[+]MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[NA]MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly using the %find_lang macro
[NA]MUST: Packages stores shared library files must call ldconfig in %post and
%postun.
[+]MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
Checked with rpmquery --list
[NA]MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review.
[+]MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
Checked with rpmquery --whatprovides
[+]MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings.
[+]MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
Checked with ls -lR
[+]MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
[+]MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
[+]MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
[+]MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the
[Bug 650181] Review Request: tkabber-plugins - Additional plugins for tkabber
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650181 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 07:33:54 EST --- tkabber-plugins-0.11.1-3.svn1948.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tkabber-plugins-0.11.1-3.svn1948.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 664904] Review Request: perl-Authen-Simple-Passwd - Simple Passwd authentication
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664904
Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr
2010-12-24 05:17:19 EST ---
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines including the Perl specific items
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported architecture.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2687620
[x] Rpmlint output: 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Buildroot is correct
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: GPL+ or Artistic
[-] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
64f37440bec901c0f59cbd5ef4c14424 Authen-Simple-Passwd-0.6.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[-] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: rawhide.x86-64
[x] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2687620
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -fR $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
[x] Package functions as described.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct.
[-] File based requires are sane.
[x] %check is present and the tests pass
All tests successful.
Files=4, Tests=11, 0 wallclock secs ( 0.06 usr 0.01 sys + 0.44 cusr 0.10
csys = 0.61 CPU)
Result: PASS
APPROVED.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661143] Review Request: votca-tools - VOTCA tools 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=661143 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 19:27:42 EST --- votca-csg-1.0.1-2.fc13, votca-tools-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 583236] Review Request: vlc - The cross-platform open-source multimedia framework, player and server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=583236 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||methe...@gmail.com --- Comment #23 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2010-12-24 15:11:52 EST --- It seems easier if phonon-vlc along with vlc stays in RPM Fusion and let phonon-gstreamer be the default for Fedora and KDE SIG can focus testing and getting the bugs fixed so that we can finally settle on one default multimedia framework from Fedora 15 onwards. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664298] Review Request: autojump - A fast way to navigate your filesystem from the command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664298 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 11:42:43 EST --- autojump-14-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/autojump-14-2.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 #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-24 19:22:47 EST --- k4dirstat-2.7.0-0.5.20101010git6c0a9e6.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 661143] Review Request: votca-tools - VOTCA tools 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=661143 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||votca-csg-1.0.1-2.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2010-12-24 19:27:10 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 663244] Review Request: CUnit - A unit testing framework for C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663244
--- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2010-12-25 03:48:20
EST ---
Please use
--datarootdir=%{_datadir}
instead of
--datarootdir=/usr/share/
and %{_datadir} in place of %{_datarootdir} in %files, just to stick to
convention.
Why set --datarootdir at all?
Its default is ${prefix}/share (also see rpm --eval %_datarootdir). ${datadir}
is set to ${datarootdir}, and lots of other autoconf variables are derived from
that value. And %configure already sets --datadir=/usr/share, too.
Then, where you use a fragile sed pattern to replace prefix with
datarootdir, you could use the default datadir instead. Or even better,
replace the sed substitution (which may fail silently or cause damage) with a
clean patch that would fail to apply if the patch target has changed.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592487] Review Request: ffgtk - A solution for controlling Fritz!Box or compatible routers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592487 --- Comment #12 from Louis Lagendijk lo...@lagendijk.xs4all.nl 2010-12-24 18:28:10 EST --- * Fri Dec 24 2010 Louis Lagendijk louis.lagend...@gmail.com 0.7.8-2 - Re-instated old print-spooler - Added a ppd for the fax printer - Automatically create/delete the required printer in cups Spec file: http://fazant.net/ffgtk/0.7.8-2/ffgtk.spec SRPM: http://fazant.net/ffgtk/0.7.8-2/ffgtk-0.7.8-2.fc14.src.rpm rpmlint output: [lo...@travel ffgtk-0.7.8.patched]$ rpmlint /home/home1/louis/rpm/RPMS/x86_64/ffgtk*fc14* /home/home1/louis/rpm/SRPMS/ffgtk-0.7.8-2.fc14.src.rpm ffgtk.spec 6 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Now checked build in mock. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 |k4dirstat-2.7.0-0.5.2010101 |0git6c0a9e6.fc14|0git6c0a9e6.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 560787] Review Request: python-mtTkinter - A thread-safe version of Tkinter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560787 Thomas Kowaliczek linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||linuxdon...@linuxdonald.de 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 664815] Review Request: perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI - PSGI adapter for CGI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664815 Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de 2010-12-25 13:04:36 EST --- Thanks for the quick review, Emmanuel! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-CGI-Emulate-PSGI Short Description: PSGI adapter for CGI Owners: corsepiu Branches: f13 f14 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652257] Review Request: focuswriter - A fullscreen, distraction-free writing program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652257 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-25 17:23:02 EST --- focuswriter-1.3.1-3.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update focuswriter'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/focuswriter-1.3.1-3.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 665676] Review Request: wordpress-plugin-defaults - defaults plugin for WordPress
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665676 Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #1 from Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org 2010-12-25 19:41:27 EST --- rpmlint is quiet, source0 matches upstream. package appears to meet rest of packaging guidelines. Pursuant to the package rename policy, I also acknowledge that this rename contains appropriate Provides and/or Obsoletes. -- This package is APPROVED by nb -- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665676] Review Request: wordpress-plugin-defaults - defaults plugin for WordPress
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665676 Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |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 664113] Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build-ebs-delivery-plugin - BoxGrinder plugin to deliver appliances as EBS AMIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664113 Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664111] Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build-s3-delivery-plugin - BoxGrinder plugin to deliver appliances to S3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664111 Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||n...@fedoraproject.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|n...@fedoraproject.org Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664113] Review Request: rubygem-boxgrinder-build-ebs-delivery-plugin - BoxGrinder plugin to deliver appliances as EBS AMIs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664113 Nick Bebout n...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||n...@fedoraproject.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|n...@fedoraproject.org Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664214] Review Request: ghc-gconf - Binding to the GNOME configuration database system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664214
Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|needinfo?(lakshminaras2002@ |
|gmail.com) |
--- Comment #2 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2010-12-25
23:02:12 EST ---
Hello,
There is a COPYING file in /usr/share/doc/ghc-gconf-{version}. That contains
the license text.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664214] Review Request: ghc-gconf - Binding to the GNOME configuration database system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664214 Cristian Ciupitu cristian.ciup...@yahoo.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|NotReady| --- Comment #3 from Cristian Ciupitu cristian.ciup...@yahoo.com 2010-12-25 23:55:27 EST --- Sorry, you're right. I looked at rpmlint's output for ghc-gconf-prof and thought that it was for ghc-gconf. As for the macros, I've noticed that xmonad uses a similar SPEC, so I guess your SPEC is fine from this point of view. koji scratch build for other reviewers: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2689186 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 663244] Review Request: CUnit - A unit testing framework for C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663244 --- Comment #5 from Shakthi Kannan shakthim...@gmail.com 2010-12-26 01:17:22 EST --- * Removed use of sed by adding a patch to fix docdir path. * Added patch to remove exit calls from library. SPEC: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/CUnit.spec SRPM: http://shakthimaan.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/CUnit-2.1_2-3.fc14.src.rpm Successful Koji builds for F-13, F-14 and EL-6 respectively: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2689210 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2689194 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2689205 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 606127] Review Request: colortool - useful tool for web-designers/graphic artists
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606127 --- Comment #6 from Tobias Vogel tobias.vo...@bluewin.ch 2010-12-26 01:38:07 EST --- I am sorry for my inactivity for this bug. I learned a lot and adjusted my SPEC-file according to this advices. Because I am currently working on a new version of my tool, I didn't post a newer SPEC-file so far, as dependencies are changing while I'm working on the new version. I will be back soon, with the new version of this tool and an updated SPEC-file for both, this and the upcoming version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 609320] Review Request: grimmer-proggy-tinysz-fonts - Proggy Tiny with slashed zero programming font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=609320 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2010-12-26 01:55:56 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 566878] Review Request: python-jswebkit - A JS way to gtkwebkit core
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566878 --- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2010-12-26 01:58:55 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 627637] Review Request: qroneko - A front end of crontab application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627637 --- Comment #6 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2010-12-26 02:02:43 EST --- Hi Praveen, Please go through the following link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group It notes the requirements to get sponsored to the packager group. regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 584111] Review Request: cmatrix - Simulate the display from The Matrix
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=584111 --- Comment #17 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2010-12-26 02:00:37 EST --- Ayush, You will need to review packages etc. in order to get sponsored to the packager group. Please have a look at this link on how to proceed. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 457709] Review Request: perizia-fonts - English asymmetric font
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=457709 --- Comment #14 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2010-12-26 02:15:54 EST --- Hello, Still a 404 on the link. regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642547] Review Request: ucd - Property data for the Unicode data set
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642547 --- Comment #5 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2010-12-26 02:13:53 EST --- Hello Jorge, Please have a look at this link in order to get sponsored : http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group regards, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
