[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 #4 from Matthew Harmsen 2011-01-13 04:02:09 EST --- Modified SRPM URL: http://mharmsen.fedorapeople.org/ipa-pki-theme-9.0.0-2.fc12.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 665853] Review Request: h5py - A Python interface to the HDF5 library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665853
Steve Traylen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Steve Traylen 2011-01-13 04:17:27
EST ---
Review of h5py, 12th January:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665853
- Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
YES: It does.
- Spec file matches base package name.
YES: It does.
- Spec has consistant macro usage.
YES: It does.
- Meets Packaging Guidelines.
YES: It does but see comments about eggs below.
- License
YES: BSD
- License field in spec matches
YES:
- License file included in package
YES: LICENSE.txt and licenses/*.txt
- Spec in American English
YES: It is.
- Spec is legible.
YES: It is.
- Sources match upstream md5sum:
YES: but see rpmlint error below.
$ md5sum h5py-1.3.1.tar.gz ../SOURCES/h5py-1.3.1.tar.gz
cfef84992d33910a06371dc35becb71b h5py-1.3.1.tar.gz
cfef84992d33910a06371dc35becb71b ../SOURCES/h5py-1.3.1.tar.gz
- Package needs ExcludeArch
YES: Builds as is in koji.
- BuildRequires correct
YES: Builds in koji
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
YES: No locale.
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
YES: Is not relocatable.
- Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
YES: It does.
- Package has a correct %clean section.
YES:
- Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
NO:
It has %(mktemp -ud %{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-XX)
- Package is code or permissible content.
YES:
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
YES: not needed.
- Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
YES: Theyt don't.
- Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
Not relavent.
- Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
Not relavent.
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
Not relavent.
- .so files in -devel subpackage.
Not relavent.
- -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
Not relavent.
- .la files are removed.
None created.
- Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file
It's not.
- Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
Koji.
- Package has no duplicate files in %files.
It does not.
- Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.]
It does not.
- Package owns all the directories it creates.
It does.
- No rpmlint output.
$ rpmlint SPECS/h5py.spec RPMS/x86_64/h5py-* SRPMS/h5py-1.3.1-1.fc14.src.rpm
SPECS/h5py.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://h5py.googlecode.com/files/h5py-1.3.1.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found
h5py.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datasets -> data sets,
data-sets, databases
h5py.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datatypes -> data types,
data-types, databases
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/utils.so utils.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/_proxy.so _proxy.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5r.so h5r.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/_conv.so _conv.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5o.so h5o.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5.so h5.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5l.so h5l.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5a.so h5a.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5f.so h5f.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5s.so h5s.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5p.so h5p.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5g.so h5g.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5z.so h5z.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5t.so h5t.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5fd.so h5fd.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5e.so h5e.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5i.so h5i.so()(64bit)
h5py.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/h5py/h5d.so h5d.so()(64bit)
h5py.sr
[Bug 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=523877 --- Comment #32 from Takanori MATSUURA 2011-01-13 04:24:59 EST --- After the discussion at legal ML, current PyCifRW is not free and not acceptable by Fedora. I'll try to the following approach. * Ask developer of PyCifRW to change license to Fedora-acceptable free one. * Ask developer of CBFlib that he can remove the dependency of PyCifRW. I already prepared PyCifRW package and I can request a package preview if PyCifRW is released with free license. If anyone interests PyCifRW package, please visit my repoview page at http://t-matsuu.sakura.ne.jp/install-memo/fedora/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Parag AN(पराग) 2011-01-13 04:33:03 EST --- koji build =>http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2718643 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 225699] Merge Review: dmraid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225699 Zdenek Kabelac changed: What|Removed |Added CC||zkabe...@redhat.com AssignedTo|jussi.leht...@iki.fi|nob...@fedoraproject.org QAContact|fedora-package-review@redha |extras...@fedoraproject.org |t.com | --- Comment #5 from Zdenek Kabelac 2011-01-13 04:45:19 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) > 3rd ping to lvm-team. Please respond. Are these problems already fixed with current releases of lvm2 rpm (RHEL6) ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: -
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||668959 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668959] Review Request: jbig2dec - A decoder implementation of the JBIG2 image compression 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=668959 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||669311 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] New: Review Request: -
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Summary: Review Request: - Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pa...@zhukoff.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/mupdf/mupdf.spec SRPM URL: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/mupdf/mupdf-0.7-1.fc14.src.rpm mock: ok koji: none because depends on https://bugzilla.redhat.com/668959 Description: MuPDF is a lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C. The renderer in MuPDF is tailored for high quality anti-aliased graphics. MuPDF renders text with metrics and spacing accurate to within fractions of a pixel for the highest fidelity in reproducing the look of a printed page on screen. MuPDF has a small footprint. A binary that includes the standard Roman fonts is only one megabyte. A build with full CJK support (including an Asian font) is approximately five megabytes. MuPDF has support for all non-interactive PDF 1.7 features, and the toolkit provides a simple API for accessing the internal structures of the PDF document. Example code for navigating interactive links and bookmarks, encrypting PDF files, extracting fonts, images, and searchable text, and rendering pages to image files is provided. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: -|toolkit written in portable ||C -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #3 from Matthew Harmsen 2011-01-13 05:05:05
EST ---
MODIFIED SPEC URL: http://mharmsen.fedorapeople.org/pki-core.spec
MODIFIED SRPM URL:
http://mharmsen.fedorapeople.org/pki-core-9.0.0-2.fc12.src.rpm
TO DO:
* only have "pki-setup" own "$dir %{_datadir}/pki"
* only have "pki-setup" own "%dir %{_localstatedir}/lock/pki"
* only have "pki-setup" own "%dir %{_localstatedir}/run/pki"
* remove versions from NSS and NSPR?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668243] Review Request: libqb - An IPC library for high performance servers.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668243 Fabio Massimo Di Nitto changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fdini...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fdini...@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 668243] Review Request: libqb - An IPC library for high performance servers.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668243 Fabio Massimo Di Nitto changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #2 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto 2011-01-13 05:14:53 EST --- NOTE to others, I can review this simple package, but I am not a sponsor. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668243] Review Request: libqb - An IPC library for high performance servers.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668243
--- Comment #3 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto 2011-01-13
05:31:58 EST ---
# MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]
rpmlint SPECS/libqb.spec SRPMS/libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm RPMS/x86_64/*
libqb.src: W: summary-ended-with-dot C An IPC library for high performance
servers.
libqb.x86_64: W: summary-ended-with-dot C An IPC library for high performance
servers.
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
pretty minor but please address this warning.
# MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines .
OK
# MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
OK
# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK
# MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
LGPLv2+ OK
# MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. [3]
OK
# 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.[4]
OK
# MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
OK
# MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
OK
# MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK
# MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]
OK
[fabbione@daikengo SRPMS]$ koji build dist-rawhide --scratch
libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm
Uploading srpm: libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm
[] 100% 00:00:03 79.28 KiB 25.79 KiB/sec
Created task: 2718693
Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2718693
Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)...
2718693 build (dist-rawhide, libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm): open
(x86-02.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2718695 buildArch (libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm, i686): open
(x86-15.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2718694 buildArch (libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm, x86_64): open
(x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org)
2718695 buildArch (libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm, i686): open
(x86-15.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
0 free 2 open 1 done 0 failed
2718694 buildArch (libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm, x86_64): open
(x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
0 free 1 open 2 done 0 failed
2718693 build (dist-rawhide, libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm): open
(x86-02.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed
0 free 0 open 3 done 0 failed
2718693 build (dist-rawhide, libqb-0.4.0-1.fc13.src.rpm) completed successfully
and tested locally on F13.
# MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line. [8]
does NOT apply
# MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK
# MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9]
does NOT apply
# MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10]
OK
# MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]
OK
# MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker. [12]
does NOT apply
# 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. [13]
OK
# MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific situations)[14]
OK
# 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. [15]
[Bug 668243] Review Request: libqb - An IPC library for high performance servers.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668243 --- Comment #4 from Fabio Massimo Di Nitto 2011-01-13 05:33:15 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > Question: > libqb does have tests that can run as a part of "make check". > Is "make check" run as a part of the normal rpm creation? > If so, is it desirable to run these as a part of building the rpm? > > I would need to add: > BuildRequires: ... check-devel I see no reason not to run the make test at build time and check-devel is only a BuildRequires that would not clutter the final rpm with extra dependencies. So please turn on make check in the build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 Parag AN(पराग) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Parag AN(पराग) 2011-01-13 05:52:07 EST --- I think still some issues are there 1) you are packaging file /usr/share/pki/setup/web-app_2_3.dtd which looks different license other than GPLv2 2)rpmlint reports pki-setup.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pki/scripts/pkicommon.pm pki-ca.noarch: E: subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/pki-cad pki-common.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pki/scripts/pkicommon.pm pki-common.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pki/setup/CertServer.directory pki-common.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pki/setup/web-app_2_3.dtd pki-common.noarch: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/pki/setup/menu.xml otherwise package built fine http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2718690 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 653805] Review Request: drupal6-ctools - This suite is primarily a set of APIs and tools to improve the developer experience.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=653805 Peter Borsa changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo?(peter.borsa@gmail | |.com) | --- Comment #15 from Peter Borsa 2011-01-13 05:53:56 EST --- Updated files: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-ctools.spec http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm rpmlint output: [asrob@alice SPECS]$ rpmlint drupal6-ctools.spec ../SRPMS/drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. koji output: Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2718750 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... 2718750 build (dist-f14, drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm): free 2718750 build (dist-f14, drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm): free -> open (ppc10.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 2718751 buildArch (drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-13.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 2718751 buildArch (drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-13.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 1 open 1 done 0 failed 2718750 build (dist-f14, drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm): open (ppc10.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 0 open 2 done 0 failed 2718750 build (dist-f14, drupal6-ctools-1.8-2.fc14.src.rpm) completed successfully -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Mohamed El Morabity changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||pikachu.2...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pikachu.2...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Mohamed El Morabity 2011-01-13 06:01:09 EST --- I will review this 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 668588] Review python26-imaging - Python's own image processing library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668588 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|662753 |662755 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666455] Review Request: sdcv - Console version of StarDict program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=666455
--- Comment #5 from Peter Lemenkov 2011-01-13 06:06:32 EST
---
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
+ rpmlint is silent
work ~: rpmlint Desktop/sdcv-*
sdcv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) Console
sdcv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) version
sdcv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) of
sdcv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) program
sdcv.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/project/sdcv/sdcv/0.4.2/sdcv-0.4.2.tar.bz2
sdcv.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) Console
sdcv.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) version
sdcv.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) of
sdcv.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(ru) program
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.
work ~:
All thgese messages are false positives and may be omitted.
+ 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. Just one cosmetic note - you'd
better to add a line break between sections, such as between %files and
%changelog. Also I don't think that installing almost empty README and (clearly
not intended for end-users) TODO is useful, but it's up to you to decide
whether or not to package it. Also I suggest you to package doc/DICTFILE_FORMAT
as %doc file.
+ The package is licensed with a Fedora approved license and meets the
Licensing Guidelines.
- The License field in the package spec file MUST match the actual license
(GPLv2+). The file src/lib/distance.cpp is licensed under GPL w/o stating
explicit GPL version (thuns it is licensed under GPL+), but its contents is
relicensed under GPLv2+ while linking.
+ 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 sdcv-0.4.2.tar.bz2*
a164f079e93986814ea2d39f3a49cf9d1b71b01aad908254457fe3d0ded9deb2
sdcv-0.4.2.tar.bz2
a164f079e93986814ea2d39f3a49cf9d1b71b01aad908254457fe3d0ded9deb2
sdcv-0.4.2.tar.bz2.1
sulaco ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES:
+ The package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
primary architecture. See koji link above.
+ All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires.
+ The spec file handles locales properly (by using the %find_lang macro).
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.
0 The package DOESN'T have a %clean section, so it won't build cleanly on
systems with old rpm. Beware.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so).
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
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.
So, please, fix the License tag, and I'll continue. The rest of my notes are
not a blocker ones.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on 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 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|662739 |662743 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 659005] Review Request: drupal6-job_scheduler - Simple API for scheduling tasks once at a predetermined time or periodically at a fixed interval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659005 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-13 06:11:36 EST --- drupal6-job_scheduler-1.0-0.2.beta3.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/drupal6-job_scheduler-1.0-0.2.beta3.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 666455] Review Request: sdcv - Console version of StarDict program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=666455 --- Comment #6 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-01-13 06:21:39 EST --- - fixed License tag - added break line between changelog and files sections SRPMS: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/sdcv/sdcv-0.4.2-4.fc14.src.rpm SPEC: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/sdcv/sdcv.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 666455] Review Request: sdcv - Console version of StarDict program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=666455 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Peter Lemenkov 2011-01-13 06:25:44 EST --- Good. I can't find any other blocking 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 669327] New: Review Request: drupal6-views_bulk_operations - This module augments Views by allowing bulk operations to be executed
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal6-views_bulk_operations - This module augments Views by allowing bulk operations to be executed https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669327 Summary: Review Request: drupal6-views_bulk_operations - This module augments Views by allowing bulk operations to be executed Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: peter.bo...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-views_bulk_operations.spec SRPM URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: This module augments Views by allowing bulk operations to be executed on the nodes displayed by a view. It does so by showing a checkbox in front of each node, and adding a select box containing operations that can be applied on the selected nodes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669327] Review Request: drupal6-views_bulk_operations - This module augments Views by allowing bulk operations to be executed
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669327 --- Comment #1 from Peter Borsa 2011-01-13 06:37:03 EST --- rpmlint output: [asrob@alice SPECS]$ rpmlint drupal6-views_bulk_operations.spec ../SRPMS/drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. koji output: Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2718812 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... 2718812 build (dist-f14, drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm): open (x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 2718813 buildArch (drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm, noarch): free 2718813 buildArch (drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm, noarch): free -> open (x86-10.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 2718813 buildArch (drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-10.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 1 open 1 done 0 failed 2718812 build (dist-f14, drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm): open (x86-07.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 0 open 2 done 0 failed 2718812 build (dist-f14, drupal6-views_bulk_operations-1.10-1.fc14.src.rpm) completed successfully -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||505154(FE-SCITECH) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 505154] Tracker: Review Requests for Science and Technology related packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505154 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||666572 Bug 505154 depends on bug 659896, which changed state. Bug 659896 Summary: Review Request: cp2k - A molecular dynamics engine capable of classical and Car-Parrinello simulations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=659896 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311
--- Comment #2 from Mohamed El Morabity 2011-01-13
07:47:08 EST ---
* You can remove libX11-devel from the BuildRequires, since it is already
required by libXext-devel
* The compilation logs are not very verbose. Especially compilation flags
cannot
be checked. Fortunately the Makefile provides a "verbose" variable to view
all
compilation commands. Please enable it:
%build
make %{?_smp_mflags} verbose=1
* The fix on the previous point leads to see that standard Fedora compilation
flags ("%{optflags}") are not used att all. They *must* be called by the
compiler:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Compiler_flags
I suggest you the following fix:
- add the following line in %prep:
%prep
[...]
sed -i "s/CFLAGS := /CFLAGS ?=\nCFLAGS += /" Makerules
It will allow passing custom CFLAGS values. Since it is a small fix, I
thought using sed would be more appropriate than a patch.
- add the following on in %build:
%build
export CFLAGS="%{optflags}"
make %{?_smp_mflags} verbose=1
* You have removed the static library libmupdf.a, and it's probably a good
thing
according to the guidelines. Unfortunately there is no corresponding shared
library (.so file), and so your -devel package is completely useless. I
suggest you to report also this issue to upstream.
I attach to this review a patch to build a dynamic version of libmupdf.a
(libmupdf.so), and to link the executables to this one, instead of embedding
the static lib. Anyway it is maybe not usable as is: it is not versionned and
that's a things to be discussed with upstream.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 --- Comment #3 from Mohamed El Morabity 2011-01-13 07:48:28 EST --- Created attachment 473308 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=473308 Patch to enable shared lib build -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669347] New: Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: colord - Color daemon https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 Summary: Review Request: colord - Color daemon Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rhug...@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://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/temp/colord.spec SRPM URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/temp/colord-0.1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2718893 Description: colord is a low level system activated daemon that maps color devices to color profiles in the system context. It will be used by GNOME Color Manager and CUPS to enable the color management of printers. [hughsie@localhost SPECS]$ rpmlint colord.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. [hughsie@localhost SRPMS]$ rpmlint colord-0.1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm colord.src: W: non-standard-group Unspecified 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [hughsie@localhost RPMS]$ rpmlint colord-0.1.0-1.fc15.i686.rpm colord.i686: W: non-standard-group Unspecified colord.i686: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/dbus-1/system.d/org.freedesktop.ColorManager.conf 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Note: if you're testing the CUPS integration, you need to use CUPS in rawhide with the enable-icc option turned on, or use http://gitorious.org/cups-colord/master/trees/master/doc and build from source. I'll be adding the support in gnome-color-manager git master to use colord as a compile option in the next few weeks, but wanted rawhide to be in a position where people can try the new code early. If you have any questions, I'm normally in IRC, nick: hughsie. Thanks, Richard. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 226190] Merge Review: netatalk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226190 Steffan changed: What|Removed |Added CC||stef...@hldns.com --- Comment #12 from Steffan 2011-01-13 08:23:17 EST --- Can this be branched to EPEL 6? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668001] Review Request: nepomukcontroller - Applet to control the Nepomuk file indexer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668001 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu 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 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 #5 from Peter Lemenkov 2011-01-13 08:47:31 EST
---
Yes, the current situation with the /etc/resolv.conf filling is a mess. Also
there are a lot of packages which doesn almost the same things, so adding
another one is not an issue.
I personally have no objections against openresolv, so (keeping in mind that it
neither conflicts with NetworkManager nor pretends to be installed by default)
here is my
REVIEW:
Legend: + = PASSED, - = FAILED, 0 = Not Applicable
- rpmlint is NOT silent
work ~: rpmlint Desktop/openresolv-3.4.1-1.fc15.*
openresolv.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) resolv -> resolve, resole,
resold
openresolv.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US resolv -> resolve,
resole, resold
^^^ False positive.
openresolv.noarch: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man8/resolvconf.8.gz
3375: bad character definition
openresolv.noarch: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man8/resolvconf.8.gz
3379: warning: macro `\}' not defined
openresolv.noarch: W: manual-page-warning
/usr/share/man/man5/resolvconf.conf.5.gz 3375: bad character definition
openresolv.noarch: W: manual-page-warning
/usr/share/man/man5/resolvconf.conf.5.gz 3379: warning: macro `\}' not defined
^^^ I failed to find what caused this message, but I'm suspection that it is
triggered by configuration snippets, containing curly brackets. I'm not sure
whether it's a issue or not.
openresolv.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) resolv -> resolve, resole,
resold
openresolv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US resolv -> resolve,
resole, resold
openresolv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dnsmasq -> dismast,
kinsman, desman
openresolv.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US resolvconf ->
resolvable, resolved, resolve
^^^ False positive.
openresolv.src: W: strange-permission openresolv-3.4.1.tar.bz2 0755L
openresolv.src: W: strange-permission openresolv-service-status-quiet.patch
0755L
openresolv.src: W: strange-permission openresolv.spec 0755L
^^^ This should be fixed as well (easyfix).
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 13 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.
+ 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. Koji scratchbuild for F-15:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2718940
+ 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 MUST own all directories that it creates. Please, mark explicitly
%{_libexecdir}/resolvconf as %dir in the %files section.
+ The package does not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files
listings.
+/- Permissions on files are set properly. Just drop executable permissions
from original sources (spec-file, patch and tarball).
0 The package DOESN'T have a %clean section, so it won't build cleanly on
systems with old rpm (EL-4 and EL-5, not sure about EL-6). Beware.
+ The package consistently uses macros.
+ The package contains code, or permissible content.
0 No extremely large documentation files.
+ Anything, the package includes as %doc, does not affect the runtime of the
application.
0 No header files.
0 No static libraries.
0 No pkgconfig(.pc) files.
0 The package doesn't contain library files without a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so).
0 No devel sub-package.
+ The package does NOT contain any .la libtool archives.
0 Not a GUI application.
+ The package does not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
+ All filenames in rpm packages are valid UTF-8.
Almost finished. Please, address issues, noted above, and I'll continue.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on 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
--- Comment #4 from Peter Lemenkov 2011-01-13 09:12:35 EST
---
Thanks for the comments!
(In reply to comment #3)
> +: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
Unfortunately I can't, and that's an Erlang-specific issue.
All Erlang packages must be installed into Erlang's own libdir (
%{_libdir}/erlang/lib ) which is arch-dependent (thus every package effectively
becomes arch-dependent). I plan to eliminate this shortcoming in the future
Fedora releases, but I wouldn't expect quick resolution (maybe in Fedora 17 or
even in Fedora 18).
> [=] 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:.
>
Done. Fixed comment, right above Source0.
Here are the latest spec and src.rpm files:
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-webmachine.spec
http://peter.fedorapeople.org/erlang-webmachine-1.8.0-2.fc12.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 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Mohamed El Morabity changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #473308|0 |1 is obsolete|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 --- Comment #4 from Mohamed El Morabity 2011-01-13 09:21:52 EST --- Since your .desktop file has a MimeType entry, you should update the desktop database as described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database It seems that mupdf cannot be launched from the menu: it expects necessarily a PDF path as argument. The .desktop file should not be displayed anyway, even if it is required to allow opening PDFs from the file explorer by a right-click. I suggest you to add the following line: NoDisplay=true to mupdf.desktop file. I've also update the shared library path to include a versionned library (set to mupdf version). Anyway, as said above, it would need upstream validation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592487] Review Request: ffgtk - A solution for controlling Fritz!Box or compatible routers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592487 --- Comment #17 from Louis Lagendijk 2011-01-13 09:19:48 EST --- (In reply to comment #16) > You should ignore rpmlint complaints about missing documentation when there is > no documentation to be had. You shouldn't fabricate documentation or > duplicate > it from the main package just to make the complaint go away. > Understood. > Perhaps you don't understand the distinction between the regular package > dependencies and scriptlet dependencies. Package dependencies simply need to > be satisfied in order for the package to work, so rpm ensures that they are > installed by the end of the transaction. Scriptlets may run at other times > (during the transaction, either before or after the package is installed, > upgraded or removed) and so any dependencies they may have needs to be > specified so that rpm will ensure those dependencies are present when the > scriptlets run. Or, to put it another way, simply having the package depend > on > something called in the scriptlets is not sufficient. > Thanks for the heads up,I was indeed not aware of the differences. I am reading the information I can find for this. > The "many duplicates in files" issue refers to the duplicated documentation. Thanks. Re. the md5 inclusion: would it help if I make a separate libmd5 package? I whipped up a quick autofoo configuration, so I could package this as a separate package. I would not know what license to put in the spec file If that would help I can add a simple check for libmd5 in ffgtk's config and be done with it. comments? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 --- Comment #5 from Mohamed El Morabity 2011-01-13 09:23:54 EST --- Created attachment 473330 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=473330 Patch to enable share library build -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652623] Review Request: erlang-bitcask - Eric Brewer-inspired key/value store
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652623 --- Comment #3 from Ville-Pekka Vainio 2011-01-13 09:29:24 EST --- I'd like to discuss a couple of things before going through a "checklist" for the review. (I know very little about erlang, but a few observations anyway.) - I'd like the build system to be even more verbose. For erl compiles it only outputs "Compiled src/bitcask_merge_worker.erl" or so. Could it also output the ecc call? (I'm assuming it's using ecc.) For C compiles it outputs something like "$CC -c $CFLAGS $DRV_CFLAGS c_src/bitcask_nifs.c -o c_src/bitcask_nifs.o" and then you need to figure out yourself from the rest of the output what those environment variables expand to. I'd like to see the exact commands it's running. However, if this is a shortcoming of rebar, then I won't consider this as a blocker for the review. - Another thing about the build. When building the C code, I'm fairly certain your package isn't passing the Fedora build options to cc. I suggest using the following line in %build, or something similar: "CFLAGS=$RPM_OPT_FLAGS rebar compile -v" -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 592487] Review Request: ffgtk - A solution for controlling Fritz!Box or compatible routers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=592487 --- Comment #18 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 09:37:41 EST --- Unfortunately FPC did not get to discuss the md5 issue this week due to time pressure. The problem with md5 on Linux is that unlike BSD there seems to be no standard system library for it (and in particular no support for it in libc). Unless you count things like nss or openssl, neither of which is really a solution for something that just needs to compute an occasional md5 hash. The situation is pretty flawed. I found a couple of other packages using the same md5.c as this package, and some other packages using an entirely different md5.c authored by Colin Plumb, and I only looked for fifteen minutes or so. It would certainly be reasonable to unbundle the md5 library, although I'm concerned that the issue is more complicated than that. Will you be the upstream for this new library? Will it support the same API as both md5.c versions? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668588] Review Request: python26-imaging - Python's own image processing library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668588 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review python26-imaging - |Review Request: |Python's own image |python26-imaging - Python's |processing library |own image processing ||library -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669394] Review Request: netty - An asynchronous event-driven network application framework and tools for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669394 Stanislav Ochotnicky changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669394] New: Review Request: netty - An asynchronous event-driven network application framework and tools for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: netty - An asynchronous event-driven network application framework and tools for Java https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669394 Summary: Review Request: netty - An asynchronous event-driven network application framework and tools for Java Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: socho...@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://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/packages/netty.spec SRPM URL: http://sochotni.fedorapeople.org/packages/netty-3.2.3-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Netty is a NIO client server framework which enables quick and easy development of network applications such as protocol servers and clients. It greatly simplifies and streamlines network programming such as TCP and UDP socket server. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 Yanko Kaneti changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||yan...@declera.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|yan...@declera.com Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Yanko Kaneti 2011-01-13 10:08:56 EST --- Source matches. License matches. No crazy binaries, permissions etc. The group rpmlint warning is not valid for F14 and up.. (apparently) Builds in mock. Installs quietly. Works as far the daemon starts when trying to use colormgr. 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 668834] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668834 --- Comment #8 from Wes Hardaker 2011-01-13 10:18:09 EST --- Thanks for the review and suggestions! I've made the appropriate changes :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655496] Review Request: cambozola - A viewer for multipart jpeg streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655496 Mat Booth changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|fed...@matbooth.co.uk Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #5 from Mat Booth 2011-01-13 10:16:44 EST --- I can take this 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 235115] Review Request: tl-netty2 - Event based network application framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=235115 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|WONTFIX |DUPLICATE --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 10:14:47 EST --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 669394 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669394] Review Request: netty - An asynchronous event-driven network application framework and tools for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669394 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nsan...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 10:14:47 EST --- *** Bug 235115 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 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 --- Comment #2 from Richard Hughes 2011-01-13 10:20:04 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: colord Short Description: Color daemon Owners: rhughes Branches: f14 InitialCC: rhughes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 Yanko Kaneti changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668834] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668834 Wes Hardaker changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Wes Hardaker 2011-01-13 10:26:38 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: cutecw Short Description: A CW (Morse Code) Training Program Owners: hardaker Branches: f13 f14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 10:24:56 EST --- FYI, install the package and run "rpmlint colord" and you'll see: colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libgthread-2.0.so.0 colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 /lib64/librt.so.1 colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 /lib64/libpthread.so.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 594064] Review Request: id3mtag - Command line mass ID3 tagging utility for audio files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594064 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596138] Review Request: nss-gui - A graphical user interface for NSS security databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596138 Jason Tibbitts changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||StalledSubmitter -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 --- Comment #4 from Yanko Kaneti 2011-01-13 10:35:04 EST --- Ok, sorry. That part of the rpmlint course is new for me. But many existing g* packages are giving me the same warning. Whats up here.. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669407] New: Review Request: ledmon - 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. Summary: Review Request: ledmon - LED control app for Intel(R) storage controllers https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669407 Summary: Review Request: ledmon - LED control app for Intel(R) storage controllers Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jmosk...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: --- THIS IS A RE-REVIEW! Please follow the instruction from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Renaming_Process Spec URL: http://jmoskovc.fedorapeople.org/ledmon.spec SRPM URL: http://jmoskovc.fedorapeople.org/ledmon-0.1-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: The ledctl is user space application design to control LEDs associated with each slot in an enclosure or a drive bay. There are two types of system: 2-LEDs system (Activity LED, Status LED) and 3-LEDs system (Activity LED, Locate LED, Fail LED). User must have root privileges to use this application. The ledctl application uses SGPIO and SES-2 protocol to control LEDs. The program implements IBPI patterns of SFF-8489 specification for SGPIO. Please note some enclosures do not stick close to SFF-8489 specification. It might happen that enclosure processor will accept an IBPI pattern but it will blink the LEDs not according to SFF-8489 specification or it has limited number of patterns supported. rpmlint output: 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. - can't test the package functionality because I don't have the required HW -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 --- Comment #6 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-01-13 10:48:23 EST --- - Fixed shared libs - fixed desktop file - fixed CFLAGS - fixed desktop database Spec URL: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/mupdf/mupdf.spec SRPM URL: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/mupdf/mupdf-0.7-2.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596138] Review Request: nss-gui - A graphical user interface for NSS security databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596138 Kai Engert (kaie) changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard|StalledSubmitter| --- Comment #10 from Kai Engert (kaie) 2011-01-13 10:46:11 EST --- I don't agree that I'm a stalled submitter :) Your comments came just one week ago, after I had waited more than 6 months for reviewer comments... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669407] Review Request: ledmon - 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=669407 --- Comment #1 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 10:49:56 EST --- Description still seems to refer to the old package name. Wasn't ledtcl just reviewed and accepted? Why is it being renamed already? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596138] Review Request: nss-gui - A graphical user interface for NSS security databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596138 --- Comment #11 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 10:51:51 EST --- That's how it works. The tag will just be re-added if you don't respond to the commentary. I'm sorry your package sat for so long; complaining to me about it when I'm the only person actually moving things forward doesn't make a whole lot of sense. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 --- Comment #5 from Yanko Kaneti 2011-01-13 10:55:52 EST --- Thanks for the pointer on irc hughsie: please be advised to add the reccommened workaround from here before importing: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#unused-direct-shlib-dependency Given how prevalent this issues is amongst the gnome stack I don't think it should block the importing of the package for now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669407] Review Request: ledmon - 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=669407 Ondrej Vasik changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ova...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ova...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Ondrej Vasik 2011-01-13 10:55:59 EST --- I guess it was because of the "already existing dead project" with ledctl name on sourceforge. Personally, I think we could keep the package as ledctl (with %setup -n) ... but if Jirka tends to rename the package, I'm not against it. Few notes before real rereview: Please remove the note about missing upstream URL, URL is now provided. You moved ledctl from %_bindir to %_sbindir - is that intentional?... it may break some scripts if someone already started with the %_bindir (I know, it is VERY low probability, but possibly some wrapper with deprecation warning could be considered). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Jiri Popelka 2011-01-13 10:58:23 EST --- Everything's OK. 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 596138] Review Request: nss-gui - A graphical user interface for NSS security databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596138 --- Comment #12 from Kai Engert (kaie) 2011-01-13 10:59:56 EST --- Jason, I'm very thankful for your review comments indeed. Not complaining at all, just saying I haven't yet switched back to this task, after having had to wait for it a long time. I will address your comments shortly. 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 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 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Peter Lemenkov 2011-01-13 11:03:02 EST --- Thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: erlang-webmachine Short Description: A REST-based system for building web applications 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 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 --- Comment #6 from Richard Hughes 2011-01-13 10:59:59 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > FYI, install the package and run "rpmlint colord" and you'll see: > > colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 > /lib64/libgmodule-2.0.so.0 > colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 > /lib64/libgthread-2.0.so.0 > colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 > /lib64/librt.so.1 > colord.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcolord.so.1.0.0 > /lib64/libpthread.so.0 I didn't know you could do that either :-) I'm pretty sure this should be fixed by changing the glib pc file to include things like librt -- it would be pretty odd for each leaf project to have to include stuff glib links to. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669407] Review Request: ledmon - 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=669407 --- Comment #3 from Jiri Moskovcak 2011-01-13 11:16:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) > I guess it was because of the "already existing dead project" with ledctl name > on sourceforge. > Personally, I think we could keep the package as ledctl (with %setup -n) ... > but if Jirka tends to rename the package, I'm not against it. > Actually I can live with ledctl using ledmon as source, but I would prefer to rename it (I was just too fast and upstream found out that ledctl is taken :( ) > Few notes before real rereview: > Please remove the note about missing upstream URL, URL is now provided. > - will do > You moved ledctl from %_bindir to %_sbindir - is that intentional?... - yes, it's an upstream change > it may > break some scripts if someone already started with the %_bindir (I know, it is > VERY low probability, but possibly some wrapper with deprecation warning could > be considered). - I built it only for rawhide so far, so I think we're safe... So the question is: Rename or not? Opinions? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669407] Review Request: ledmon - 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=669407 --- Comment #4 from Jiri Moskovcak 2011-01-13 11:24:21 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > Description still seems to refer to the old package name. - the package contains 2 applications ledctl and ledmon. The description is referring to the application not to the package - which should be probably made more clear.. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311
Jussi Lehtola changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
--- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola 2011-01-13 11:28:26
EST ---
A few comments:
- I think you can safely drop the unnecessary "written in portable C" part of
the summary.
- Mixing %{name} and "mupdf" in %files (and %install) is bad style. Please
stick choose a convention and stick with it.
- There's also no need to use %{__chmod} for chmod, although there is currently
no guideline forbidding it.
- In general, one can override variables such as CFLAGS with e.g.
make verbose=1 CFLAGS="%{optflags}"
However, in this case the Makefile is badly written as includes are made part
of CFLAGS. Thus one would either have to manually append the necessary includes
to the overriding definition, or apply a patch.
Running sed may result in the same thing, but it also can break silently. Using
patches is a lot safer in this respect.
- The -devel package should have
Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
instead of the plain
Requires: %{name} = %{version}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 655496] Review Request: cambozola - A viewer for multipart jpeg streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655496
--- Comment #6 from Mat Booth 2011-01-13 11:34:12 EST
---
Ok, a quick look shows the following needs to be corrected:
* Licence is incorrect, it should be GPLv2+ according the distributed licence
and source file headers.
* Unless you plan on participating in EPEL5, the BuildRoot tag is obsolete.
EPEL6+ and Fedora 10+ ignore it entirely and it may be removed.
* There is no require for "Requires: %{name}" in the javadoc sub-package. This
should be removed.
* In the recently approved new Java guidelines, we no longer should be shipping
versioned jars or javadocs, so please drop the symlinks and install everything
without the %{version} suffix.
* A %clean section containing only "rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT" is no longer needed
(except perhaps if you intend on participating in EPEL5) and should be removed
* Please reduce the spelling errors that rpmlint complains about where you can.
Change "javadocs" to "javadoc" and change "cheesey" to "cheesy". The rest
really should be in the dictionary, so I'm willing to overlook them.
Also, if you wish you may put the accent aigu "é" in your name in the change
log -- you are allowed to submit UTF-8 encoded spec 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 655496] Review Request: cambozola - A viewer for multipart jpeg streams
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=655496 --- Comment #7 from Mat Booth 2011-01-13 11:54:40 EST --- BTW, if you remove the BuildRoot tag, you may ignore the rpmlint warning "no-buildroot-tag." -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661436] Review Request: rubygem-heroku - deploy apps to Heroku
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661436 --- Comment #47 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-13 11:55:53 EST --- rubygem-heroku-1.17.5-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-heroku-1.17.5-1.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 661436] Review Request: rubygem-heroku - deploy apps to Heroku
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=661436 --- Comment #46 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-13 11:55:46 EST --- rubygem-heroku-1.17.5-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-heroku-1.17.5-1.fc13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added External Bug ID||Ghostscript 691884 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added External Bug ID||Ghostscript 691885 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666455] Review Request: sdcv - Console version of StarDict program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=666455 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-01-13 12:14:39 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: sdcv Short Description: Console version of StarDict program format system Owners: landgraf Branches: F-13 F-14 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 472229] Review Request: PyQwt - Python bindings for Qwt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472229 --- Comment #18 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:21:05 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 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 --- Comment #34 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:21:20 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668959] Review Request: jbig2dec - A decoder implementation of the JBIG2 image compression 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=668959 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:26:09 EST --- It is too early to request f15 branches. Otherwise... 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 668834] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668834 --- Comment #10 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:25:26 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 226281] Merge Review: perl-TermReadKey
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226281 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:24:16 EST --- Please don't include a change request if you're not going to include a proper one; it just confuses the scripts. Simply raising the flag and describing what you need done should be sufficient. I added perl-sig to all of the Fedora branches. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 666455] Review Request: sdcv - Console version of StarDict program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=666455 --- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:25:11 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 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:26:25 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #7 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:24:54 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 643199] Review Request: python-pymtp - A Pythonic wrapper around libmtp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=643199 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-13 12:24:39 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 665560] Review Request: rubygem-mail - A Really Ruby Mail Library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665560 --- Comment #5 from Minnikhanov 2011-01-13 12:51:13 EST --- Upstream release - 2.2.14 January 4, 2011 Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-mail.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-mail-2.2.14-1.fc14.src.rpm koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2719362 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668959] Review Request: jbig2dec - A decoder implementation of the JBIG2 image compression 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=668959 Pavel Zhukov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-01-13 13:09:20 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 669311] Review Request: mupdf - A lightweight PDF viewer and toolkit written in portable C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669311 Bug 669311 depends on bug 668959, which changed state. Bug 668959 Summary: Review Request: jbig2dec - A decoder implementation of the JBIG2 image compression format https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668959 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668959] Review Request: jbig2dec - A decoder implementation of the JBIG2 image compression 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=668959 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-13 13:24:01 EST --- jbig2dec-0.11-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jbig2dec-0.11-2.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 669347] Review Request: colord - Color daemon
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669347 Richard Hughes changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-01-13 13:24:28 --- Comment #8 from Richard Hughes 2011-01-13 13:24:28 EST --- Great, thanks guys! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-13 13:28:02 EST --- erlang-webmachine-1.8.0-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/erlang-webmachine-1.8.0-2.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 668959] Review Request: jbig2dec - A decoder implementation of the JBIG2 image compression 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=668959 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-13 13:24:24 EST --- jbig2dec-0.11-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jbig2dec-0.11-2.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 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |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 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 Peter Lemenkov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-01-13 13:30:05 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 652629] Review Request: erlang-riak_kv - Riak Key/Value Store
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652629 Bug 652629 depends on bug 652546, which changed state. Bug 652546 Summary: Review Request: erlang-webmachine - A REST-based system for building web applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652546 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |MODIFIED Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|MODIFIED|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 652665] Review Request: erlang-luwak - Large-object storage interface for Riak
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652665 Bug 652665 depends on bug 652546, which changed state. Bug 652546 Summary: Review Request: erlang-webmachine - A REST-based system for building web applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652546 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||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 652598] Review Request: erlang-riak_core - Distributed systems infrastructure used by Riak
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652598 Bug 652598 depends on bug 652546, which changed state. Bug 652546 Summary: Review Request: erlang-webmachine - A REST-based system for building web applications https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652546 What|Old Value |New Value Status|NEW |MODIFIED Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|MODIFIED|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 226190] Merge Review: netatalk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=226190 frankl...@googlemail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||frankl...@googlemail.com --- Comment #13 from frankl...@googlemail.com 2011-01-13 13:49:51 EST --- +1. Netatalk is actually well maintained these days. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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
Matthew Harmsen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
--- Comment #6 from Matthew Harmsen 2011-01-13 14:00:52
EST ---
# cd pki/specs
# svn diff ipa-pki-theme.spec
Index: ipa-pki-theme.spec
===
--- ipa-pki-theme.spec (revision 1729)
+++ ipa-pki-theme.spec (working copy)
@@ -1,10 +1,6 @@
-###
-### P A C K A G E H E A D E R
###
-###
-
Name: ipa-pki-theme
Version: 9.0.0
-Release: 1%{?dist}
+Release: 2%{?dist}
Summary: Certificate System - IPA PKI Theme Components
URL: http://pki.fedoraproject.org/
License: GPLv2
@@ -23,69 +19,25 @@
%endif
%global overview \
-== \
-|| ABOUT "CERTIFICATE SYSTEM" || \
-== \
- \
-Certificate System (CS) is an enterprise software system designed \
-to manage enterprise Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) deployments. \
- \
-The IPA PKI Suite is comprised of the following subsystems:\
- \
- * Certificate Authority (CA) \
- \
-Additionally, it provides javadocs on portions of the API, as well as \
-various command-line tools used to assist with an IPA deployment. \
- \
-To successfully deploy instances of a CA, \
-a Tomcat Web Server must be up and running locally on this machine.\
- \
-To meet the database storage requirements of each CA \
-instance, a 389 Directory Server must be up and running either locally \
-on this machine, or remotely over the attached network connection. \
- \
-IPA utilizes the 'pkicreate' utility to install a PKI subsystem, and \
-the 'pkisilent' utility to perform a batch configuration of this PKI \
-subsystem. \
- \
-After installation of this package, IPA utilizes the 'pkicreate' and \
-'pkiremove' utilities to respectively create and remove PKI instances. \
- \
-For deployment purposes, IPA PKI requires ALL of the subpackages \
-defined by the "pki-core" package. \
- \
+Several PKI packages require a "virtual" Theme component. These \
+"virtual" Theme components are "Provided" by various Theme "flavors" \
+including "dogtag", "redhat", and "ipa". Consequently,\
+all "dogtag", "redhat", and "ipa" Theme components MUST be \
+mutually exclusive!\
%{nil}
%description %{overview}
-###
-### S U B P A C K A G E H E A D E R S
###
-###
-
-##
-## ipa-pki-common-theme ##
-##
-
%package -n ipa-pki-common-theme
Summary: Certificate System - PKI Common Framework User Interface
Group:System Environment/Base
-# NOTE: Several PKI packages require a "virtual" Theme component. These
-#"virtual" Theme components are "Provided" by various Theme "flavors"
-#including "dogtag", "redhat", and "ipa". Consequently,
-#all "dogtag", "redhat", and "ipa" Theme components MUST be
-#mutually exclusive!
Conflicts:dogtag-pki-common-theme
Conflicts:dogtag-pki-common-ui
Conflicts:redhat-pki-common-theme
Conflicts:redhat-pki-common-ui
-Obsoletes:
[Bug 665853] Review Request: h5py - A Python interface to the HDF5 library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665853 --- Comment #3 from Terje Røsten 2011-01-13 14:11:49 EST --- Thanks! Updated package: - fix buildroot - add filter - don't remove egg-info files - remove explicit hdf5 req - build and ship docs as html Unsure about the -fopenp thingie. There is a bug in rpmlint (or the google server is a bit funny): https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669339 python 2.5 seems to be a hard req. btw: I don't maintain EPEL packages. spec: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/h5py/h5py.spec srpm: http://terjeros.fedorapeople.org/h5py/h5py-1.3.1-3.fc14.src.rpm koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2719548 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
