[Bug 668628] Review Request: node.js - a javascript framework for server side 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=668628 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 03:05:35 EST --- Isn't this the same package as https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634911 which is under review now? At least a quick look tells me so. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573918] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-LLC - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573918 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||573917 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573917] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.1D Spanning Tree protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573917 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||573918 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 --- Comment #8 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 03:58:21 EST --- Ping, Tom! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866 --- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 04:03:04 EST --- Koji scratchbuild for Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2714364 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573918] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-LLC - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573918
Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmasl...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 04:08:00
EST ---
- rpmlint OK
- package must be named according to Guidelines OK
- spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK
- package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK
- package must be licensed with Fedora approved license OK
- license field must match actual license ?
^ License is ArtisticClarified, at least the link in LLC.pm
- text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK
- sources must match the upstream source OK
- package MUST successfully compile and build OK
- architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK
- build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
- handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK
- shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK
- packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK
- package must own all directories that it creates OK
- permissions on files must be set properly OK
- package must consistently use macros OK
- package must contain code, or permissable content OK
- large documentation must go in a -doc OK
- %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK
- header files must be in a -devel package OK
- static libraries must be in a -static package OK
- library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK
- devel package usually require base package OK
- packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK
- GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK
- packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK
rpm -q --provides perl-NetPacket-LLC
perl(NetPacket::LLC) = 0.01
perl-NetPacket-LLC = 0.01-1.fc15
rpm -q --requires perl-NetPacket-LLC
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.2)
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1
perl = 0:5.006
perl(strict)
perl(vars)
perl(warnings)
rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1
Fix of license is 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 663018] Review Request: gnome-guitar - A small suite of applications for the guitarist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663018 --- Comment #2 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 04:27:01 EST --- Koji scratchbuild for F-15: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2714366 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866
Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 04:25:49 EST
---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+/- rpmlint is almost silent
work ~: rpmlint Desktop/xqc-1.0-0.1.20101120svn.fc15.*
xqc.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/include/xqc.h
^^^ this seems to be ok. This package contains only this file. Although I
prefer that such packages should be named ad *-devel I have no strong opinion
here.
xqc.src: W: invalid-url Source0: xqc.tar.gz
^^^ that's ok for development snapshots.
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
work ~:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines. I have only two cosmetic
suggestions:
* You may use svn export instead of svn co (you don't need to explicitly remove
.svn case of using export)
* Explicitly mentioning svn version in %version field sounds like a good idea.
These notes won't block the approval - feel free to ignore them.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license (BSD).
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji link above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
+ The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
+/- The package contains only one header file. Generally, we're placing such
files into *-devel packages but IMO this is not the same case - *-devel
packages are supplementary ones to the other rpms, which could be used
standalone. So I don't think we need to create virtual provides or rename
package here - this package is specifically designed to contain only header
files.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1).
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Ok, here is a summary:
* Please, consider my cosmetic notes above.
* Regardless of the result of your consideration (these notes are just cosmetic
ones), 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 489130] Review Request: gnome-guitar - A small suite of applications for the guitarist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=489130 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||663018(gnome-guitar) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 663018] Review Request: gnome-guitar - A small suite of applications for the guitarist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663018 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||489130 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866 --- Comment #5 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-01-11 05:04:24 EST --- Thank you for the review and your notes, Peter. Much appreciated. I prefer to keep the package name xqc because this is the name of the upstream project, and xqc-devel might indicate that there must be a corresponding non-devel xqc package (just my impression). I'll think about your other suggestions. Thanks again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573918] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-LLC - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573918 --- Comment #2 from Jan Klepek jan.kle...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 05:27:49 EST --- fixed: SPEC: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-NetPacket-LLC.spec SRPM: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-NetPacket-LLC-0.01-2.fc13.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 663925] Review Request: autoconf-archive - The Autoconf Macro Archive
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663925 --- Comment #2 from Takanori MATSUURA t.mat...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 05:26:32 EST --- Spec URL: http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/mock/autoconf-archive/autoconf-archive.spec SRPM URL: http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/mock/autoconf-archive/autoconf-archive-2011.01-02-0.fc14.src.rpm Update to 2011.01.02. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573917] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.1D Spanning Tree protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573917 --- Comment #1 from Jan Klepek jan.kle...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 05:33:38 EST --- SRPM URL: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-NetPacket-SpanningTree-0.01-2.fc13.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 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 --- Comment #9 from sucheta.chakrabo...@qlogic.com 2011-01-11 05:37:51 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) Sucheta, the files are likely to be identical. This package is simply awaiting review for inclusion into Fedora (since it is a new package). Ok. Thanks Tom. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 663018] Review Request: gnome-guitar - A small suite of applications for the guitarist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663018
--- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 05:41:54 EST
---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is not silent
work ~: rpmlint Desktop/gnome-guitar-*
gnome-guitar.x86_64: E: no-binary
gnome-guitar.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
^^^ This is a mono package - it does installs bytecode into arch-dependent
locations.
gnome-guitar.x86_64: W: conffile-without-noreplace-flag
/etc/gconf/schemas/libgnomeguitar.schemas
^^^ gconf data must not use (noreplace) so it's ok too.
gnome-guitar.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-scale
gnome-guitar.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-chord
^^^ It's Ok too. Still no man-pages for these binaries.
gnome-guitar-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US config -
con fig, con-fig, configure
^^^ False positive. Should be ignored.
gnome-guitar-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
^^^ No documentation for this sub-package. So should be ignored too,
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.
work ~:
+ The package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. Citing from
previous review: upstream has slightly different name: gnome-guitar_cs, but
according to the NamingGuidelines it is possible to change it e.g. if the
original name uses wrong characters or would be somehow strange ;-) - ubuntu
also already named the package without _cs
+ The spec file name matches the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
+ The package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines (GPLv3+.
+ The License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
+ The file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package, is included
in %doc.
+ The spec file is written in American English.
+ The spec file for the package is legible.
+ The sources used to build the package, match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES: sha256sum gnome-guitar_cs-0.8.1.tar.gz*
5b411154ff9a5445ddaec03bdc787a0067fc3e07c978dfc3560de2667f76f558
gnome-guitar_cs-0.8.1.tar.gz
5b411154ff9a5445ddaec03bdc787a0067fc3e07c978dfc3560de2667f76f558
gnome-guitar_cs-0.8.1.tar.gz.1
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji link above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
0 No need to handle locales.
0 No shared library files in some of the dynamic linker's default paths.
+ The package does NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
0 The package is not designed to be relocatable.
+ The package owns all directories that it creates.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+ Permissions on files are set properly.
+ The package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No header files.
0 No static libraries.
+ The pkgconfig(.pc) files are stored in a -devel package and necessary runtime
requirement added.
0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so).
+ The -devel package requires the base package using a fully versioned
dependency: Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
+ The package includes a %{name}.desktop file, and this file is properly
installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section.
- The package MUST depend on hicolor-icon-theme due to dependency on
/usr/share/icons/hicolor/64x64/apps directory. Perhaps some runtime dependency
picks it up during installation process. Otherwise you MUST add explicit
Requires: hicolor-icon-theme.
Actually I believe that it's a generally good idea to list all such
dependencies explicitly disregarding of whether underlying dependent packages
pull them into installation chain. So I advice you to add Requires:
hicolor-icon-theme.
+ At the beginning of %install, the package runs rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Ok, so here is a summary - please, comment the situation with
hicolor-icon-theme (either prove that some underlying package from this
package's dependency chain will install it, or explicitly add it as the
Requires) and I'll finish the review.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
[Bug 658611] Review Request: nuxwdog
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=658611 Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC|matth...@rpmforge.net | Component|p7zip |Package Review AssignedTo|panem...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #16 from Matthias Saou matth...@rpmforge.net 2011-01-11 05:44:37 EST --- Fixing the component, which probably got changed by mistake. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666572] Review Request: zyGrib - Visualization of meteo data from files in GRIB 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=666572 --- Comment #5 from Pavel Zhukov pa...@zhukoff.net 2011-01-11 05:57:05 EST --- - fixed - update to new upstream version 3.9.9 mock: ok koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2714454 SRPM: http://repo.pclinuxos.su/fedora/rpm/zyGrib-3.9.9-1.fc14.src.rpm spec: http://repo.pclinuxos.su/fedora/rpm/zyGrib.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866 Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-01-11 06:04:19 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: xqc Short Description: C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors Owners: mgieseki Branches: f13 f14 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 532534] Review request: xml-im-exporter - XML Im-/Exporter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=532534 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED CC||akurt...@redhat.com Blocks|163776(FE-NEW) |201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution||WONTFIX Flag|fedora-review+ | Last Closed||2011-01-11 06:26:07 --- Comment #7 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 06:26:07 EST --- Closing the bug as dead. Mary won't be able to finish it soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573918] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-LLC - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573918 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 06:32:45 EST --- Successful build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2714577 ACCEPT -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665544 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||akurt...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 06:35:33 EST --- Latest version 0.5.1 is out since long time is there a reason to not update it? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573918] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-LLC - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573918 Jan Klepek jan.kle...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jan Klepek jan.kle...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 06:46:00 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-NetPacket-LLC Short Description: Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets Owners: hpejakle Branches: f13 f14 el5 el6 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 487978] Review Request: sqlitebrowser - Design and edit database files compatible with SQLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=487978 --- Comment #12 from Karel Volný kvo...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 06:56:46 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) * What kind of hardware should I have ? any that runs Fedora :-) ... well, in theory, you should test on all architectures supported by the package, in practice it is enough to use one * How many resources are required on the machine(s) (RAM, disk) ? there are no such requirements - it is nice if you have enough resources to compile packages you maintain (i.e. you need disk space for the development packages), but you can workaround by using scratch build feature in koji * What are the requirements on the Fedora install(s) ? (So far, I have tended to skip every other release, lazy, probably. But that probably won't do, as a Fedora developer ? ) it is not that important what are you running, but it is nice if you dogfood i.e. use the recent version of the package (on a recent system) yourself you can also install different release in a virtual machine ... * Excluding the work done on the actual packages (which probably varies wildly), how much free time (per week ? day ??) must one have to keep up with things ? hard to tell, depends on your level of involvement ... you are not obliged to follow all the news and what is cooking, it is sufficient to keep eye on the announcements (which is low volume, a few messages per week), and there is not much to act on - transition of development resources from cvs to git or similar things don't happen every day don't be afraid, just try that, and if you find it too much, you can always give up -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652616] Review Request: erlang-ebloom - A NIF wrapper around a basic bloom filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652616
--- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 07:07:05 EST
---
(In reply to comment #2)
I take this one. If you like, I'd appreciate a review of the tiny xqc package
(bug #655866) :)
Some initial comments:
- The binary package provides the erlang extension library ebloom_nifs.so.
Is this library supposed to be accessible by other external applications
too?
If not, I suggest to filter it from the provides list as described in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:AutoProvidesAndRequiresFiltering
Yes, indeed - this should be filtered out.
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-ebloom.spec
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-ebloom-1.0.2-2.fc12.src.rpm
I added only filtering of internal dynamic library - no other changes.
- you can simplify the %files section by replacing all file/dir lines with the
single line
%{_libdir}/erlang/lib/%{realname}-%{version}/
But that's optional and a matter of personal preference
Actually, I personally prefer to list them in this way :). I plan to write a
checking tool which would analyze %files sections for my internal needs, so I
would need full enumeration of packaged files and directories.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668197] Review Request: ledctl - LED control app for Intel(R) storage controllers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668197 --- Comment #7 from Jiri Moskovcak jmosk...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 07:51:35 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) Git done (by process-git-requests). Thank you! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652616] Review Request: erlang-ebloom - A NIF wrapper around a basic bloom filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652616
Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2011-01-11
08:28:38 EST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
Actually, I personally prefer to list them in this way :).
That's OK.
The package looks fine to me now. Just two minor notes (no blockers though):
- You can drop Requires: erlang-stdlib as it's a dependency of erlang-erts.
This would also remove the rpmlint error below.
- it would be nice if upstream could add the texts of the involved licenses
(CPL, ASL 2.0)
$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-i386/result/*.rpm
erlang-ebloom.i686: E: explicit-lib-dependency erlang-stdlib
erlang-ebloom.i686: W: no-documentation
erlang-ebloom.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
basho-ebloom-ebloom-1.0.2-0-g0d070d8.tar.gz
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.
- the error explicit-lib-dependency is false positive but can be avoided by
dropping Requires: erlang-stdlib
- the missing doc warning is expected and no blocker
-
key:
[+] OK
[.] OK, not applicable
[X] needs work
-
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}.
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license.
- C sources of filter algorithm: CPL
- NIF wrapper code: ASL 2.0
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
[.] MUST: The file containing the text of the license(s) for the package must
be included in %doc.
- no license files present
[+] 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.
$ md5sum basho-ebloom-ebloom-1.0.2-0-g0d070d8.tar.gz*
cf6f766679ce10ad9d42e78090979f27
basho-ebloom-ebloom-1.0.2-0-g0d070d8.tar.gz
cf6f766679ce10ad9d42e78090979f27
basho-ebloom-ebloom-1.0.2-0-g0d070d8.tar.gz.1
[+] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture.
koji scratch build (f14):
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2714702
[.] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work ...
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires.
[.] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
[.] MUST: Packages storing shared library files (not just symlinks) must call
ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
[.] MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, ...
[+] MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
[+] MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in %files.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
[+] 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: Files in %doc must not affect the runtime of the application.
[.] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[.] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[.] MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix ...
[.] MUST: devel packages must require the base package
[+] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
[.] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file.
[+] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
[+] MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[X] SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[+] SHOULD: The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[+] SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package functions as described.
- seems to work properly
[.] SHOULD: If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane.
[.] SHOULD: Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency.
[.] SHOULD: pkgconfig(.pc) should be placed in a -devel pkg.
[+] SHOULD: If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin,
/usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file
instead of the file itself.
[.] SHOULD: your package should contain man pages for
[Bug 668639] Review Request: google-lato-fonts - A sanserif typeface family
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668639 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pin...@pingoured.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pin...@pingoured.fr --- Comment #1 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-01-11 08:39:37 EST --- I'll take it -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665544] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665544 --- Comment #2 from Omair Majid oma...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 08:48:50 EST --- There are (incompatible) API changes between 0.4.1 and 0.5.1. The only package that uses ini4j is netbeans. Netbeans 6.9 (f14+rawhide) still depends on 0.4.1. Netbeans 7.0 (which is currently in beta) will require 0.5.1. -- 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 652616] Review Request: erlang-ebloom - A NIF wrapper around a basic bloom filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652616 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 08:48:42 EST --- Thanks! I'll contact upstream regarding adding explicit licensing information. As for erlang-stdlib - all these dependencies are automatically added, and I'll try to improve the scripts used for dependency resolution in the future. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: erlang-ebloom Short Description: A NIF wrapper around a basic bloom filter Owners: peter Branches: f14 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664817] Review Request: perl-HTML-Selector-XPath - CSS Selector to XPath compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664817 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ppi...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653435] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Engine-PSGI - PSGI engine for Catalyst
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653435 --- Comment #2 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 09:06:42 EST --- Update and fix: SPEC: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Catalyst-Engine-PSGI.spec SRPM: http://mmaslano.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Catalyst-Engine-PSGI-0.12-1.fc15.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666954] Review Request: cherrytree - Hierarchical note taking 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=666954
--- Comment #12 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11
09:20:52 EST ---
cherrytree 0.19.1 was just released. It contains more or less the same patch as
Tomas proposed, see
http://code.google.com/p/giuspen-cherrytree/source/detail?r=2d2e8c770f15c86b2e3a12300380557526c1c29f
Upstream also confirmed that pygtk2-libglade is not necessary because he only
uses gtkuilder and not libglade itself.
However I have a problem/question now: When using setup.py, a egg is created.
What to do with it? Is it worth packaing when I install to
/usr/share/cherrytree instead of %{python_sitelib}?
Changes:
* Tue Dec 11 2011 Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org - 0.19.1-1
- Update to 0.19.1
- Use setup.py instead of manual installation
- BR python2-devel instead of python-devel
SPEC: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/cherrytree.spec
I will post a final package one I know what do do with the egg.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664817] Review Request: perl-HTML-Selector-XPath - CSS Selector to XPath compiler
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664817 --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 09:44:15 EST --- Source tar ball is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/HTML/Selector/XPath.pm. Ok. License verified from lib/HTML/Selector/XPath.pm. Ok. Description verified from lib/HTML/Selector/XPath.pm. Ok. FIX: BuildRequire perl(Exporter) (lib/HTML/Selector/XPath.pm:7) as it can dual-live in the future (http://search.cpan.org/~ferreira/Exporter/). All test passes. Ok. $ rpmlint perl-HTML-Selector-XPath.spec ../SRPMS/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04-1.fc14.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04-1.fc14.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 led 11 15:33 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04 -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 447 úno 27 2010 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04/Changes -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 558 úno 27 2010 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04/README -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2517 led 11 15:33 /usr/share/man/man3/HTML::Selector::XPath.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 led 11 15:33 /usr/share/perl5/HTML drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 led 11 15:33 /usr/share/perl5/HTML/Selector -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 6059 úno 27 2010 /usr/share/perl5/HTML/Selector/XPath.pm File permissions and layout Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04-1.fc14.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Carp) 1 perl(Exporter) 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.2) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl = 0:5.008_001 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1 1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 Binary requires Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04-1.fc14.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(HTML::Selector::XPath) = 0.04 1 perl-HTML-Selector-XPath = 0.04-1.fc14 Binary provides Ok. $ resolvedeps-f15 ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTML-Selector-XPath-0.04-1.fc14.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. Package builds in F15 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2714859). Ok. Otherwise package is in line with Fedora and perl packaging guidelines. Please correct all `FIX' prefixed issues and provide new spec file. Resolution: Package NOT 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 668639] Review Request: google-lato-fonts - A sanserif typeface family
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668639 Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 10:15:40 EST --- I've just updated the fonts: SPEC: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/google-lato-fonts/google-lato-fonts.spec SRPM: http://melmorabity.fedorapeople.org/packages/google-lato-fonts/google-lato-fonts-1.011-1.fc14.src.rpm The fonts are now taken from are in the Google Font Directory hg repo. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666954] Review Request: cherrytree - Hierarchical note taking 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=666954
--- Comment #13 from Robin Lee robinlee.s...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 10:32:13
EST ---
About eggs, refer to
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Packaging_eggs_and_setuptools_concerns
.
In the case of cherrytree, it is the second case of the above definitions of
eggs.
Including the egg is a 'Should' but not a 'Must', and for cherrytree, the
egg-info file is useless.
But if nothing was installed to %{python_sitelib}, the 'python(abi)'
requirement will not be auto-generated.
After all, just include the egg.
New rpmlint result:
$ rpmlint ./cherrytree-0.19.1-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
cherrytree.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml - XML, cml, ml
cherrytree.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ctd - cts, ct, cd
cherrytree.noarch: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/share/cherrytree/glade/cherrytree.glade.h
cherrytree.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/share/applications/cherrytree.desktop
cherrytree.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary cherrytree
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
* TODO: The header file is included again.
* TODO: Add 'chmod -x linux/cherrytree.desktop' to %prep and notify upstream.
And you may notify upstream of these issues.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on 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 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 10:41:22 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: netxen-firmware Short Description: QLogic Linux Intelligent Ethernet (3000 and 3100 Series) Adapter Firmware Owners: spot Branches: f13 f14 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652546] Review Request: erlang-webmachine - A REST-based system for building 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=652546 Jiri Popelka jpope...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jpope...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jpope...@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 634911] Review Request: nodejs - Evented I/O for v8 JavaScript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634911 --- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-01-11 11:10:49 EST --- Is anything happening with this ticket? Someone else has submitted a node.js package, and it would be a shame to close it as a duplicate when this one has stalled out. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 648023] Review Request: erlang-js - A Friendly Erlang to Javascript Binding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=648023 --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 11:09:35 EST --- Ver. 0.5.0: http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-js.spec http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-js-0.5.0-1.fc12.src.rpm Koji scratchbuild for F-14: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2715012 rpmlint: work ~/Desktop: rpmlint erlang-js-* erlang-js.src:10: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 10, tab: line 5) erlang-js.src: W: invalid-url Source0: basho-erlang_js-erlang_js-0.5.0-0-g5350ed2.tar.gz 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. work ~/Desktop: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668628] Review Request: node.js - a javascript framework for server side 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=668628 Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lkund...@v3.sk --- Comment #2 from Lubomir Rintel lkund...@v3.sk 2011-01-11 11:29:24 EST --- Patrice, this is being worked on; you're more than welcome to join forces. I keep a sort of a status dashboard here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Lkundrak/NodeJS -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668794] New: Review Request: pgsphere -Spherical data types, functions, and operators for PostgreSQL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pgsphere -Spherical data types, functions, and operators for PostgreSQL https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668794 Summary: Review Request: pgsphere -Spherical data types, functions, and operators for PostgreSQL Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sergio.pa...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/pgsphere.spec SRPM URL: http://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/pgsphere-1.1.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: pgSphere is a server side module for PostgreSQL. It contains methods for working with spherical coordinates and objects. It also supports indexing of spherical objects. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 663092] Review Request: oxygen-gtk - Oxygen GTK theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663092 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2011-01-11 11:35:06 EST --- Thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: oxygen-gtk Short Description: Oxygen GTK theme Owners: rdieter Branches: f13 f14 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 659370] Review Request: python-tgmochikit - MochiKit JavaScript library packaged for TurboGears widgets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659370 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-01-11 11:34:29 --- Comment #6 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 11:34:29 EST --- Built for f14, el6, and rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666529] Review Request: python-orange - Python AI component based 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=666529 Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a.bad...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 11:41:36 EST --- This review request is a duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=645321 Maybe you guys could work together to create and review the package? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652546] Review Request: erlang-webmachine - A REST-based system for building 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=652546
Jiri Popelka jpope...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Jiri Popelka jpope...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 11:46:00 EST
---
+:ok, =:needs attention, -:needs fixing
MUST Items:
[=] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
Rpmlint shows that the package contains no binary.
Are the *.beam files architecture dependent ?
If not then you should use BuildArch: noarch
[+] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}
[+] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
and meet the Licensing Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match
the actual license.
[+] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text
of the license(s) in its own file, then that file,
containing the text of the license(s)
for the package must be included in %doc.
[+] MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
[+] MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
[=] MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL says:
There are several cases where upstream is not providing the source to you in an
upstream tarball.
In these cases you must document how to generate the tarball used in the rpm
either through
a spec file comment or a script included as a separate SourceX:.
[+] MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one supported 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.
[+] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires
[N/A] MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly.
This is done by using the %find_lang macro.
[N/A] MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared
library files (not just symlinks)
in any of the dynamic linker's default paths,
must call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
[N/A] 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.
If it does not create a directory that it uses,
then it should require a package which does create that directory.
[+] MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files listing.
[+] MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly.
Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example.
Every %files section must include a %defattr(...) line.
[+] MUST: Each package must have a %clean section,
which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[+] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described
in the macros section of Packaging Guidelines.
[+] MUST: The package must contain code, or permissible content.
This is described in detail in the code vs. content
section of Packaging Guidelines.
[N/A] MUST: Large documentation files should go in a doc subpackage.
[+] MUST: If a package includes something as %doc,
it must not affect the runtime of the application.
[N/A] MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
[N/A] MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
[N/A] MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must
'Requires: pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability).
[N/A] MUST: If a package contains library files with
a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end
in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package.
[N/A] MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require
the base package using a fully versioned dependency:
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
[N/A] MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives,
these should be removed in the spec.
[N/A] MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include
a %{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly
installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section.
[N/A] MUST: Packages must not own files or directories
already owned by other packages.
[+] MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run
rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
[Bug 614299] Review Request: python-ordereddict - Py2.7's new collections.OrderedDict that works in Python 2.4-2.6.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=614299 --- Comment #14 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 11:49:19 EST --- I see that you've built package in koji for el5 and f13 but not submitted them to the download repositories. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=11231 (The el5 and f13 packages are tagged into *-candidate right now.) You can submit them to the stable repos in bodhi: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bodhi_Guide#Workflow You can also close this bug as the review is complete. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653435] Review Request: perl-Catalyst-Engine-PSGI - PSGI engine for Catalyst
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653435
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 11:49:31 EST ---
Spec file changes:
--- perl-Catalyst-Engine-PSGI.spec 2010-11-15 13:59:23.0 +0100
+++ perl-Catalyst-Engine-PSGI.spec.1 2011-01-11 15:05:00.0 +0100
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-Catalyst-Engine-PSGI
Summary:PSGI engine for Catalyst
-Version:0.11
+Version:0.12
Release:1%{?dist}
License:GPL+ or Artistic
Group: Development/Libraries
@@ -13,11 +13,49 @@
BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst::Runtime) = 5.80007
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker) = 6.42
BuildRequires: perl(Filter::Util::Call)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec)
+BuildRequires: perl(Moose)
+BuildRequires: perl(Scalar::Util)
+BuildRequires: perl(URI)
+BuildRequires: perl(MyApp)
+
+
+#Tests dependencies:
+BuildRequires: perl(Plack::Loader)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Requires)
+BuildRequires: perl(lib)
+BuildRequires: perl(LWP::UserAgent)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst::Utils)
+#BuildRequires: perl(Moose::Utils)
+BuildRequires: perl(namespace::clean)
+BuildRequires: perl(MooseX::MethodAttributes)
+BuildRequires: perl(Moose::Role)
+BuildRequires: perl(YAML)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTML::Entities)
+BuildRequires: perl(Data::Dumper)
+BuildRequires: perl(MRO::Compat)
+BuildRequires: perl(FindBin)
+BuildRequires: perl(Benchmark)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst::Request)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst::Request::Upload)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Body::OctetStream)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Headers)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Headers::Util)
+BuildRequires: perl(HTTP::Request::Common)
+BuildRequires: perl(Path::Class::Dir)
+BuildRequires: perl(CGI::Simple::Cookie)
+BuildRequires: perl(Getopt::Long)
+BuildRequires: perl(Pod::Usage)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst::Engine::HTTP)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst::Restarter)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Pod::Coverage) = 1.04
Requires: perl(Catalyst::Action::RenderView)
Requires: perl(Catalyst::Runtime) = 5.80007
Requires: perl(Filter::Util::Call)
-
+Requires: perl(Plack::Loader)
%{?perl_default_filter}
%{?perl_default_subpackage_tests}
@@ -49,11 +87,14 @@
%files
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
-%doc Changes README Changes README
+%doc Changes README
%{perl_vendorlib}/*
%{_mandir}/man3/*.3*
%changelog
+* Tue Jan 11 2011 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 0.12-1
+- update to 0.12
+
* Mon Nov 15 2010 Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 0.11-1
- specfile by Fedora::App::MaintainerTools 0.006
Source tar ball is original. Ok.
Sources perl requires changes:
$ diff -Naur Catalyst-Engine-PSGI-0.1{1,2}/ | grep '^[+-]' | grep -E
'\(use|require)\'
-use 5.008000;
+use 5.006000;
+use Fcntl ':flock';
+use Config;
-use Test::SharedFork;
+use Test::SharedFork 0.12;
+use Carp ();
FIX: BuildRequire perl(File::Spec) as it can dual-live in the future
(lib/Catalyst/Helper/PSGI.pm:4, http://search.cpan.org/~smueller/PathTools/)
+BuildRequires: perl(File::Spec)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Moose) (lib/Catalyst/Engine/PSGI.pm:7:use Moose)
+BuildRequires: perl(Moose)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Scalar::Util) as it can dual-live in the future
(lib/Catalyst/Engine/PSGI.pm:20,
http://search.cpan.org/~gbarr/Scalar-List-Utils/)
+BuildRequires: perl(Scalar::Util)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(URI) (lib/Catalyst/Engine/PSGI.pm:21)
+BuildRequires: perl(URI)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(MyApp) (lib/Catalyst/Engine/PSGI.pm:210)
+BuildRequires: perl(MyApp)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Plack::Loader) (lib/Plack/Test/Adopt/Catalyst.pm:9)
+BuildRequires: perl(Plack::Loader)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Test::More) (t/hello.t:2)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Test::Requires) (t/hello.t:3)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::Requires)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(lib) as it can dual-live in the future (t/hello.t:4,
http://search.cpan.org/~smueller/lib/)
+BuildRequires: perl(lib)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(LWP::UserAgent) (t/hello.t:6)
+BuildRequires: perl(LWP::UserAgent)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Catalyst)
(t/catalyst/lib/TestAppChainedAbsolutePathPart.pm:4)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Catalyst::Utils)
(t/catalyst/lib/TestAppChainedAbsolutePathPart.pm:8)
+BuildRequires: perl(Catalyst::Utils)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(Moose::Utils)
(t/catalyst/lib/TestApp/Controller/Anon.pm:13)
+#BuildRequires: perl(Moose::Utils)
Build-time dependency removed from 0.12 sources. Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(namespace::clean)
(t/catalyst/lib/TestApp/Controller/Moose.pm:5)
+BuildRequires: perl(namespace::clean)
Ok.
FIX: BuildRequire perl(MooseX::MethodAttributes)
(t/catalyst/lib/TestApp/Controller/Moose.pm:8)
+BuildRequires:
[Bug 663018] Review Request: gnome-guitar - A small suite of applications for the guitarist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663018 --- Comment #4 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 11:52:12 EST --- Hello, Thanks for the review and comments. I checked monodevelop spec file, it also adds hicolor-icon-theme explicitly in Requires. I have made the change in this spec file as well. https://sites.google.com/site/lakshminaras2002/home/gnome-guitar.spec?attredirects=0d=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 668628] Review Request: node.js - A javascript framework for server side 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=668628 Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: node.js - |Review Request: node.js - A |a javascript framework for |javascript framework for |server side application|server side application -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664906] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR - Provide patterns for CIDR blocks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664906 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ppi...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 573848] Review Request: perl-NetPacket - Modules to assemble/disassemble network packets at the protocol level
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573848 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11 12:00:00 EST --- perl-NetPacket-1.0.1-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update perl-NetPacket'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-NetPacket-1.0.1-1.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664924] Review Request: perl-Plack-Middleware-Test-StashWarnings - Test your application's warnings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664924
Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová mmasl...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 12:05:52
EST ---
- rpmlint OK
- package must be named according to Guidelines OK
- spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK
- package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK
- package must be licensed with Fedora approved license OK
- license field must match actual license OK
- text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK
- sources must match the upstream source OK
- package MUST successfully compile and build OK
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2715113
- architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK
- build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
- handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK
- shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK
- packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK
- package must own all directories that it creates OK
- permissions on files must be set properly OK
- package must consistently use macros OK
- package must contain code, or permissable content OK
- large documentation must go in a -doc OK
- %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK
- header files must be in a -devel package OK
- static libraries must be in a -static package OK
- library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK
- devel package usually require base package OK
- packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK
- GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK
- packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK
You should create a bug for:
Checking if your kit is complete...
Warning: the following files are missing in your kit:
xt/synopsis.t
Please inform the author.
rpm -q --provides perl-Plack-Middleware-Test-StashWarnings
perl(Plack::Middleware::Test::StashWarnings) = 0.04
perl-Plack-Middleware-Test-StashWarnings = 0.04-1.fc15
rpm -q --requires perl-Plack-Middleware-Test-StashWarnings
perl = 0:5.008_001
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.2)
perl(Carp)
perl(Storable)
perl(parent)
perl(strict)
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1
rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1
--
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 663018] Review Request: gnome-guitar - A small suite of applications for the guitarist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663018 --- Comment #5 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 12:27:14 EST --- SRPM link https://sites.google.com/site/lakshminaras2002/home/gnome-guitar-0.8.1-9.fc15.i686.rpm?attredirects=0d=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 645321] Review Request: python-orange - Orange data mining library 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=645321 --- Comment #8 from Howard Ning mrlhwlibe...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 12:38:54 EST --- python-orange has bundled library libsvm. It would be a major problem. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668822] New: Review Request: rubygem-memcache-client - A Ruby library for accessing memcached
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-memcache-client - A Ruby library for accessing memcached https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668822 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-memcache-client - A Ruby library for accessing memcached Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmo...@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://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-memcache-client.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-memcache-client-1.8.5-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: A Ruby library for accessing memcached. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668824] New: Review Request: rubygem-text-hyphen - Multilingual word hyphenation according to modified TeX hyphenation pattern files
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-text-hyphen - Multilingual word hyphenation according to modified TeX hyphenation pattern files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668824 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-text-hyphen - Multilingual word hyphenation according to modified TeX hyphenation pattern files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmo...@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://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-text-hyphen.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-text-hyphen-1.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Multilingual word hyphenation according to modified TeX hyphenation pattern files -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668820] New: Review Request: rubygem-rdoc - RDoc produces HTML and command-line documentation for Ruby projects
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-rdoc - RDoc produces HTML and command-line documentation for Ruby projects https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668820 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rdoc - RDoc produces HTML and command-line documentation for Ruby projects Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmo...@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://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-rdoc.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-rdoc-3.4-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: RDoc produces HTML and command-line documentation for Ruby projects. RDoc includes the +rdoc+ and +ri+ tools for generating and displaying online documentation. See RDoc for a description of RDoc's markup and basic use. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 645321] Review Request: python-orange - Orange data mining library 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=645321 Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stjepan.g...@gmail.com --- Comment #6 from Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 12:26:13 EST --- *** Bug 666529 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 645321] Review Request: python-orange - Orange data mining library 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=645321 --- Comment #7 from Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 12:28:49 EST --- I also created package for orange not knowing that it was already done. Anyway, I don't insist on packaging orange so the Ning can use anything he finds usefull from my try. And I checked my package with rpmlint and there are no warning or error apart from rpath that I already described as potentially harmless in the bugzilla entry 666529. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668153] Review Request: openresolv - Management framework for resolv.conf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668153 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||lemen...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lemen...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 12:44:35 EST --- I'll review it -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668542] Review Request: php-pChart - A PHP class to build charts.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668542
Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2011-01-11 13:11:45
EST ---
Good:
+ Base name of the SPEC files matches to package name.
+ Package fullfill naming guidelines
+ Package is build for noarch
+ Package cleans the buildroot in the %clean and %install section
+ Package contains no subpackages
Bad:
- This is not the most current release. On upstream I have found a note about
the release of 1.27c
- I would make the removement of the CRs in the example file into a loop.
- Why to you refer to %{_datadir}/doc/%{name} directory in the %doc stanza
- Please create a separate font package, because yoyur package contains fonts
- Package contains no verbatin copy of the license text. Please contact
upstream for including on to the upstream distributation.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664906] Review Request: perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR - Provide patterns for CIDR blocks
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=664906 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 12:36:36 EST --- Source tar ball is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/Regexp/Common/net/CIDR.pm. Ok. License verified from Makefile.PL. Ok. Description verified from lib/Regexp/Common/net/CIDR.pm. Ok. BuildRequires Ok. No tests provided. Ok. $ rpmlint perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR.spec ../SRPMS/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02-1.fc14.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02-1.fc14.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 led 11 18:23 /usr/share/doc/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02 -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 762 bře 26 2007 /usr/share/doc/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02/README -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2139 led 11 18:23 /usr/share/man/man3/Regexp::Common::net::CIDR.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 led 11 18:23 /usr/share/perl5/Regexp drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 led 11 18:23 /usr/share/perl5/Regexp/Common drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 led 11 18:23 /usr/share/perl5/Regexp/Common/net -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1099 bře 26 2007 /usr/share/perl5/Regexp/Common/net/CIDR.pm Files permission and layout Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02-1.fc14.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.2) 1 perl(Regexp::Common) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1 1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 Binary requires Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02-1.fc14.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Regexp::Common::net::CIDR) = 0.02 1 perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR = 0.02-1.fc14 Binary provides Ok. $ resolvedeps-f15 ../RPMS/noarch/perl-Regexp-Common-net-CIDR-0.02-1.fc14.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. Package builds in F15 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2715301). Ok. Package in in line with Fedora and perl packaging guidelines. Ok. Resolution: Package 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 668821] New: Review Request: rubygem-isolate - Isolate is a 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. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-isolate - Isolate is a very simple RubyGems sandbox https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668821 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-isolate - Isolate is a very simple RubyGems sandbox Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmo...@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://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-isolate.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-isolate-3.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Isolate is a very simple RubyGems sandbox. It provides a way to express and automatically install your project's Gem dependencies. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-01-11 13:19:17 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 573918] Review Request: perl-NetPacket-LLC - Assemble and disassemble IEEE 802.3 LLC protocol packets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573918 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-01-11 13:18:42 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 652616] Review Request: erlang-ebloom - A NIF wrapper around a basic bloom filter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652616 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-01-11 13:18:58 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 663092] Review Request: oxygen-gtk - Oxygen GTK theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663092 --- Comment #12 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-01-11 13:19:46 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 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 --- Comment #11 from Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu 2011-01-11 13:19:29 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 668591] Review Request: python26-markupsafe - Implements a XML/HTML/XHTML Markup safe string 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=668591
Jeffrey Ness jeffrey.n...@rackspace.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jeffrey.n...@rackspace.com
--- Comment #1 from Jeffrey Ness jeffrey.n...@rackspace.com 2011-01-11
13:23:33 EST ---
Hello Steve,
This is unofficial as I am not yet sponsored, however below are a few things I
noticed.
While attempting to build this package with mock using epel-5-i386 I received
some issues:
running install_scripts
+ rm -rf
'/var/tmp/python26-markupsafe-0.11-2.el5-root-mockbuild//usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/markupsafe/*.c'
+ chmod 755
/var/tmp/python26-markupsafe-0.11-2.el5-root-mockbuild//usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/markupsafe/_speedups.so
chmod: cannot access
`/var/tmp/python26-markupsafe-0.11-2.el5-root-mockbuild//usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/markupsafe/_speedups.so':
No such file or directory
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.12050 (%install)
running install_scripts
+ chmod 755
/var/tmp/python26-markupsafe-0.11-2.el5-root-mockbuild//usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/markupsafe/_speedups.so
chmod: cannot access
`/var/tmp/python26-markupsafe-0.11-2.el5-root-mockbuild//usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages/markupsafe/_speedups.so':
No such file or directory
--
The problems seems to be due to explicitly setting python26_sitearch to lib64:
%global python26_sitearch /usr/lib64/python2.6/site-packages
I would suggest being a bit less strict (or specifying the buildarch), below is
the macro I normally use for python_sitearch
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros):
%{!?python_sitearch: %global python_sitearch %(%{__python} -c from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib(1)))}
%endif
--
Another thing I noticed is in your %files you own everything in the path by
this package:
%{python26_sitearch}/*
Please be more specific here as you do not wish to list files owned by other
packages in yours:
%{python26_sitearch}/markupsafe/
%{python26_sitearch}/MarkupSafe-0.11-py2.6.egg-info/
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 533919] Review Request: mplus-fonts - The M+ family of fonts designed by Coji Morishita
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533919 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-01-11 13:32:14 --- Comment #25 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 13:32:14 EST --- This package has been import and build, closing this ticket. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668834] New: Review Request: cutecw - CW (Morse Code) training software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: cutecw - CW (Morse Code) training software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668834 Summary: Review Request: cutecw - CW (Morse Code) training software Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: wjhns...@hardakers.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.hardakers.net/temp/cutecw.spec SRPM URL: http://www.hardakers.net/temp/cutecw-0.4-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Most morse code (CW) training requires you to learn everything at once without a training process. This application changes that and separates training into phases. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 646606] Rename review: drupal-workspace - drupal6-workspace
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646606
Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #5 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2011-01-11 13:43:57
EST ---
Good:
+ Basename of the SPEC file matches with package name.
+ Package contains most recent version of the application
+ Download of the upstream tar ball via spectool -g works fine
+ Packaged tar ball matches with upstream
(md5sum: 31c3096654914eb2c58971de355d21a8)
+ Package contains valid BuildRoot definition
+ Package will build for noarch
* Package contains a License tag
* License tag specified GPL as a OSS license
+ Package contains verbatin copy of the license text
+ Local build works fine
+ Rpmlint is silent on source rpm
+ Scratch build works fine on koji
+ All files in the file stanza are own by this package
+ Files in the package has prpoer file permissions
+ There a no files with the same name in ohter package
+ %doc stanza is small, no we don't need a separate doc subpackage
Bad:
- Package should contains Provides: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- Rpmlint comlaints on binary rpm:
$ rpmlint drupal6-workspace-6.x.1.4-3.rc1.fc14.noarch.rpm
drupal6-workspace.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided drupal-workspace
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
- Because this package contains a prerelease, the releasenumber should start
with 0.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 663018] Review Request: gnome-guitar - A small suite of applications for the guitarist
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663018 Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 12:48:30 EST --- Ok, I don't see any other issues, so this package is APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666529] Review Request: python-orange - Python AI component based 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=666529 Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE Last Closed||2011-01-11 12:26:13 --- Comment #5 from Stjepan Gros stjepan.g...@gmail.com 2011-01-11 12:26:13 EST --- Ok, I'll close this review request and transfer this to another bugzilla entry. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 645321 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668823] New: Review Request: rubygem-text-format - Text::Format formats fixed-width text nicely
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-text-format - Text::Format formats fixed-width text nicely https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668823 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-text-format - Text::Format formats fixed-width text nicely Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmo...@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://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-text-format.spec SRPM URL: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-text-format-1.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Text::Format is provides the ability to nicely format fixed-width text with knowledge of the writeable space (number of columns), margins, and indentation settings. Text::Format can work with either TeX::Hyphen or Text::Hyphen to hyphenate words when formatting. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668836] New: Review Request: ipa-pki-theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ipa-pki-theme https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668836 Summary: Review Request: ipa-pki-theme Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: panem...@gmail.com ReportedBy: kwri...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, mharm...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com, aw...@redhat.com, kcham...@redhat.com Blocks: 520534 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Need to get ipa-pki-theme built in koji. Summary: Certificate System - IPA PKI Theme Components spec file and src.rpm will be posted shortly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668839] New: Review Request: pki-core
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: pki-core https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668839 Summary: Review Request: pki-core Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: panem...@gmail.com ReportedBy: kwri...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, mharm...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com, aw...@redhat.com, kcham...@redhat.com Blocks: 520534 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- Need to get ipa-pki-theme built in koji. Summary: Certificate System - PKI Core Components spec file and src.rpm will be posted shortly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 566403] Review Request: dnsmap - Passive DNS network mapper a.k.a. subdomains bruteforcer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=566403 --- Comment #16 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-01-11 14:02:10 EST --- I think that this package can be pushed to stable and this review 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 668542] Review Request: php-pChart - A PHP class to build charts.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668542
--- Comment #2 from Jeffrey Ness jeffrey.n...@rackspace.com 2011-01-11
14:02:04 EST ---
Hello Jochen,
Thanks for your time, below I addressed your recommendations above:
- This is not the most current release. On upstream I have found a note about
the release of 1.27c
SOURCE/generate-tarball.sh script does pull the latest version (1.27d), I
have updated the SPEC to reflect this
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Package_Versioning)
- I would make the removement of the CRs in the example file into a loop.
I now call all Example files as Example*.php
- Why to you refer to %{_datadir}/doc/%{name} directory in the %doc stanza
This has been changed to Example*.php
- Please create a separate font package, because yoyur package contains fonts
The SPEC file removes the fonts as it is not required (not licensed
properly), any TrueType font can be used (such as liberation-fonts).
- Package contains no verbatin copy of the license text. Please contact
upstream for including on to the upstream distributation.
Notified upstream:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/pchart/forums/forum/822589/topic/3943092/index/page/1
---
Spec URL: http://flip-edesign.com/source/php-pChart/php-pChart.spec
SRPM URL:
http://flip-edesign.com/source/php-pChart/php-pChart-1.27d-5.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 668839] Review Request: pki-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=668839 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 14:05:58 EST --- SPEC URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-core/pki-core.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/pki-core/pki-core-9.0.0-1.fc13.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 646608] Rename review: drupal-service_links - drupal6-service_links
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646608
Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|joc...@herr-schmitt.de
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Jochen Schmitt joc...@herr-schmitt.de 2011-01-11 14:09:09
EST ---
Good:
+ Basename of the SPEC file matches to package name
+ Package fullfill naming guidelines
+ Package contains most recent stable release of the application
+ Pakckage contains a valid license tag
+ License tag states GPLv2+ as a valid OSS license
+ Package contains a verbatin copy of the license text
+ Package contains no subpackages
+ Could download upstream tarball via spectool -g
+ Package tar ball matches with upstream
(md5sum: 603aec311fdf709dc9dbeef917284116)
+ consistantly usage of rpm macros
+ Local build works fine
+ Scatch build works fine on koji
+ All package files are own by the package
+ All files has proper file permission
+ %doc stanza is small, so no separate doc sub package is required
+ package has proper chagelog entries
Bad:
- Package should contains Provides: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- Rpmlint has the following complaints on the binary package:
rpmlint drupal6-service_links-6.x.2.0-2.fc14.noarch.rpm
drupal6-service_links.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US icio -
icily, icing, icicle
drupal6-service_links.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gnolia -
magnolia, goliard, Goliath
drupal6-service_links.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided drupal-service_links
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
Please Check:
? Rpmlint has complaints on source package:
rpmlint drupal6-service_links-6.x.2.0-2.fc14.src.rpm
drupal6-service_links.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US icio -
icily, icing, icicle
drupal6-service_links.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gnolia -
magnolia, goliard, Goliath
drupal6-service_links.src: W: strange-permission service_links-6.x-2.0.tar.gz
0444L
drupal6-service_links.src:29: W: macro-in-comment %patch0
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668153] Review Request: openresolv - Management framework for resolv.conf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668153 Dan Williams d...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||d...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Dan Williams d...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 14:10:54 EST --- Does this work exactly like resolvconf? We've had no end of problems with people using resolvconf with NetworkManager, and it's usually fixed by just removing resolvconf entirely. Ubuntu doesn't even install resolvconf by default anymore. How is the final resolv.conf generated and what algorithm defines the priority of nameservers in the final file? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668836] Review Request: ipa-pki-theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668836 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Wright kwri...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 14:15:26 EST --- SPEC URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/ipa-pki-theme/ipa-pki-theme.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/kwright/ipa-pki-theme/ipa-pki-theme-9.0.0-1.fc13.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 667790] Review Request: python-audioprocessing - Python audio processing suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667790 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-01-11 14:21:30 EST --- Just a quick comment Please avoid the usage of INSTALLED_FILES http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668153] Review Request: openresolv - Management framework for resolv.conf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668153 --- Comment #3 from Dan Williams d...@redhat.com 2011-01-11 14:22:22 EST --- Second, the fact that all resolvconf implementations use the network interface names as an ordering and tracking mechanism is completely wrong, since what you want to do for priority here has nothing to do with the interface name, and everything to do with the network you're connecting to, which is independent of the interface name that's connecting to that network. Plus interface names can be anything. Essentially, using a resolvconf framework does not play well with an actual dynamic system. Third, resolvconf simply cannot handle bad ordering, if a program crashes or otherwise does not remove its configuration. So I'm kind of curious what the motivations for this are, and what problems a resolvconf implementation would actually solve? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 502227] Review Request: virtuoso-opensource - A high-performance object-relational SQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=502227 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #33 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2011-01-11 14:25:34 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: virtuoso-opensource New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: rdieter InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11 14:28:59 EST --- xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.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 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866 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 655866] Review Request: xqc - C/C++ API for interfacing with XQuery processors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655866 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11 14:29:06 EST --- xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xqc-1.0-0.2.20101120svn7.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 663092] Review Request: oxygen-gtk - Oxygen GTK theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663092 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11 14:33:34 EST --- oxygen-gtk-1.0.0-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/oxygen-gtk-1.0.0-2.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 663092] Review Request: oxygen-gtk - Oxygen GTK theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663092 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-01-11 14:34:08 EST --- oxygen-gtk-1.0.0-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/oxygen-gtk-1.0.0-2.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 663092] Review Request: oxygen-gtk - Oxygen GTK theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=663092 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 640455] Review Request: python-pyro - Pyro is short for PYthon Remote Objects.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=640455 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #6 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-01-11 15:14:19 EST --- The latest release of Pyro4 is 4.2. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665168] Review Request: nautilus-sendto-trac - Nautilus context menu for sending files to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665168 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fab...@bernewireless.net --- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-01-11 14:54:58 EST --- This package fails to build. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2715761 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668821] Review Request: rubygem-isolate - Isolate is a 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=668821 Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE Last Closed||2011-01-11 14:54:59 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2011-01-11 14:54:59 EST --- I already own rubygem-isolate. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=11275 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 657591 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 CC||mmo...@redhat.com --- Comment #6 from Mamoru Tasaka mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2011-01-11 14:54:59 EST --- *** Bug 668821 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665168] Review Request: nautilus-sendto-trac - Nautilus context menu for sending files to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665168
Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fab...@bernewireless.net
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-01-11
15:05:48 EST ---
Package Review
==
Package:
Key:
- = 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
[!] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary RPMs on at least one
supported architecture
Tested: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2715761
[x] Rpmlint output:
Source RPM:
[...@laptop023 SRPMS]$ rpmlint nautilus-sendto-trac-0.3-1.fc14.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Binary RPM(s):
[...@laptop023 x86_64]$ rpmlint nautilus-sendto*
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x] Package is not relocatable
[-] Buildroot is correct (if it's still used)
master : %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
spec file:
[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: GPLv2+
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc
[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
Upstream source: 9ff3f6c57e7bce802e71e9f2a4146094
nautilus-sendto-trac-0.3.tar.gz
Build source:9ff3f6c57e7bce802e71e9f2a4146094
nautilus-sendto-trac-0.3.tar.gz
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch
[-] Architecture independent packages have: BuildArch: noarch
[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. %find_lang used for locales
[x] %{optflags} or RPM_OPT_FLAGS are honoured
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required
[-] %install starts with rm -rf %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT (if it's still
used)
[-] Package must own all directories that it creates
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files
[x] Permissions on files are set properly. %defattr(-,root,root,-) is in every
%files section
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime
[-] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT (if it's still used)
[-] Included tests passed successfully
[x] Package consistently uses macros
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content
[x] Included filenames are in UTF-8
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required
[-] Header files (.h) in -devel subpackage, if present
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackage, if present
[-] Static libraries (.a) in -static subpackage, if present
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x] -debuginfo subpackage is present and looks complete
[x] No pre-built binaries (.a, .so*, executable)
[-] Package contains a properly installed .desktop file if it is a GUI
application
[-] Follows desktop entry spec
[-] Valid .desktop Name
[-] Valid .desktop GenericName
[-] Valid .desktop Categories
[-] Valid .desktop StartupNotify
[-] .desktop file installed with desktop-file-install in %install
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[!] Timestamps preserved with cp and install
[x] Uses parallel make (%{?_smp_mflags})
[x] Latest version is packaged
[-] 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
[?] Package functions as described
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files is correct
[-] File based requires are sane
[x] Changelog in allowed format
- The package builds on F14 -
[Bug 668863] New: Review Request: dolphin-connector - Simple MySQL C API wrapper for C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dolphin-connector - Simple MySQL C API wrapper for C++ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668863 Summary: Review Request: dolphin-connector - Simple MySQL C API wrapper for C++ Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: wl...@primate.com.br QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://poetinha.fedorapeople.org/dolphin-connector.spec SRPM URL: http://poetinha.fedorapeople.org/dolphin-connector-1.0-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: Dolphin Connector is a simple MySQL C API wrapper for C++. It is originally designed to be as efficient as is possible, and makes no use of exceptions. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668591] Review Request: python26-markupsafe - Implements a XML/HTML/XHTML Markup safe string 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=668591
--- Comment #2 from Steve Traylen steve.tray...@cern.ch 2011-01-11 15:52:05
EST ---
Hi Jeffrey,
http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python26-markupsafe/python26-markupsafe.spec
http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/python26-markupsafe/python26-markupsafe-0.11-3.el5.src.rpm
your comments are both certainly valid, thank you.
I've left the hardcoded 2.6 in the sitearch variable since the whole package
is very hardcoded to 2.6 and RHEL5 anyway. Of course I now use %{_libdir} for
the 32bit vs 64bit.
In fact if use
%{!?python_sitearch: %global python_sitearch %(%{__python} -c from
distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib(1)))}
%endif
in this case you get an error in koji since %{_pyhton} (python2.6) does
not exist when the .srpm is created.
Steve.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
