[Bug 672015] Review Request: perl-Eval-Closure - Safely and cleanly create closures via string eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672015 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-25 02:44:14 EST --- perl-Eval-Closure-0.01-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Eval-Closure-0.01-1.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 672015] Review Request: perl-Eval-Closure - Safely and cleanly create closures via string eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672015 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672015] Review Request: perl-Eval-Closure - Safely and cleanly create closures via string eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672015 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-25 02:44:21 EST --- perl-Eval-Closure-0.01-1.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Eval-Closure-0.01-1.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 672455] New: perl-AnyEvent-DBus - Adapt Net::DBus to AnyEvent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: perl-AnyEvent-DBus - Adapt Net::DBus to AnyEvent https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672455 Summary: perl-AnyEvent-DBus - Adapt Net::DBus to AnyEvent Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: boche...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-AnyEvent-DBus.spec SRPM: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/perl-AnyEvent-DBus-0.31-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Loading this module will install the necessary magic to seamlessly integrate Net::DBus into AnyEvent. $ rpmlint -i perl-AnyEvent-DBus.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -i perl-AnyEvent-DBus-0.31-1.fc15.src.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -i perl-AnyEvent-DBus-0.31-1.fc15.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 517462] Review Request: voicedata-zh_TW-gcin-EdwardLiu - Chinese voice data from gcin project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517462 Ruediger Landmann changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|NEW Status Whiteboard||NotReady Flag|fedora-review? | --- Comment #6 from Ruediger Landmann 2011-01-25 01:32:37 EST --- Thanks; that was enough for me to find the relevant discussion; noting it here for future reference: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-08-19/fedora-meeting.2009-08-19-16.01.rst.html http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2009-09-09/fedora-meeting.2009-09-09-16.02.html In light of those discussions, I'll leave this where it lies and mark it NotReady on the whiteboard until there's more movement on the issues discussed in those logs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671434] Review Request: trytond-sale - sale for Tryton
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671434 --- Comment #3 from Tim Lauridsen 2011-01-25 01:21:31 EST --- [x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. MD5SUM this package : f0c3d21b915f0e6db39d24a91bf8620d MD5SUM upstream package : f0c3d21b915f0e6db39d24a91bf8620d [x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported architecture. rpmlint (srpm) : trytond-sale-1.8.0-3.fc15.src.rpm --- trytond-sale.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C sale module for Tryton 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. --- rpmlint : trytond-sale-1.8.0-3.fc14.noarch.rpm --- trytond-sale.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C sale module for Tryton trytond-sale.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/trytond/modules/sale/tests/test_sale.py 0644L /usr/bin/env 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. --- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 467655] Review Request: yafaray - a raytracer for Blender.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467655
--- Comment #96 from Ruediger Landmann 2011-01-25
01:19:35 EST ---
Sorry again: of course I meant:
Obsoletes: %{yname} < %{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 671434] Review Request: trytond-sale - sale for Tryton
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671434
--- Comment #2 from Tim Lauridsen 2011-01-25 01:19:07 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
Common part from all trytond- packages
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [1]
[x] Spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x] Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names.
[x] Package consistently uses macros.
[x] Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x] PreReq is not used.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [2]
[x] Buildroot is correct
(%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)).
[x] Package run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) and the beginning of
%install.
[x] Package use %makeinstall only when ``make install DESTDIR=...'' doesn't
work.
[x] Package has a %clean section, which contains rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
[-] The spec file handles locales properly.
[x] Changelog in prescribed format.
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[-] License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines.
[3,4]
[x] Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-] Compiler flags are appropriate.
[-] %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[-] ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Each %files section contains %defattr.
[x] No %config files under /usr.
[-] %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop using
desktop-file-install file if it is a GUI application. [5]
[-] Package contains a valid .desktop file.
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x] File names are valid UTF-8.
[-] Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[x] Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] Package contains no bundled libraries.
[-] Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Static libraries in -static subpackage, if present.
[x] Package contains no static executables.
[-] Package requires pkgconfig, if .pc files are present.
[-] Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la).
[x] Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x] Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x] Package does not genrate any conflict.
[x] Package does not contains kernel modules.
[x] Package is not relocatable.
[x] Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x] Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines. [6]
=== SUGGESTED ITEMS ===
[?] Package functions as described.
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-] If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[!] Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x] SourceX is a working URL.
[x] SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[?] Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[!] %check is present and all tests pass.
[-] Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package
using a fully versioned dependency.
[?] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[?] Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x] Dist tag is present.
[x] Spec use %global instead of %define.
[-] Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-] No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[?] Packages should try
[Bug 467655] Review Request: yafaray - a raytracer for Blender.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=467655
Ruediger Landmann changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(r...@lcg.ufrj.br)
--- Comment #95 from Ruediger Landmann 2011-01-25
01:18:46 EST ---
Sorry; I pasted the wrong "provides" line. The problem is here:
Obsoletes: %{yname} <= %{version}
Provides: %{yname} = %{version}-%{release}
Since we never shipped yafaray, we arguably don't need this Obsoletes: at all,
but I agree it's nice to have. If you can change this to:
Obsoletes: %{yname} = %{version}
(and equivalent for the subpackages) I think we will be done 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 671434] Review Request: trytond-sale - sale for Tryton
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671434 Tim Lauridsen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671434] Review Request: trytond-sale - sale for Tryton
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671434 Tim Lauridsen changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|t...@rasmil.dk -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671434] Review Request: trytond-sale - sale for Tryton
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671434 Tim Lauridsen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671434] Review Request: trytond-sale - sale for Tryton
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671434 --- Comment #1 from Tim Lauridsen 2011-01-25 01:05:43 EST --- I will review 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 652987] Review Request: go - The Go programming language
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=652987 --- Comment #19 from Renich Bon Ciric 2011-01-25 00:11:16 EST --- Can somebody link this request to this bug, please? http://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=1280 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672440] New: Review Request: flann - Fast Library for Approximate Nearest Neighbors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: flann - Fast Library for Approximate Nearest Neighbors https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672440 Summary: Review Request: flann - Fast Library for Approximate Nearest Neighbors Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: richmat...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/flann/flann.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/flann/flann-1.6.7-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: FLANN is a library for performing fast approximate nearest neighbor searches in high dimensional spaces. It contains a collection of algorithms found to work best for nearest neighbor search and a system for automatically choosing the best algorithm and optimum parameters depending on the data sets. rpmlint: $ rpmlint flann.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/flann* flann.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libflann.so.1.6.7 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 flann-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation flann-python.x86_64: W: no-documentation flann-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation 5 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. The shared-lib-calls-exit issue is something to take up with upstream. The package is pretty sparse on documentation, but the base package includes a pdf manual and all the subpackages require the base package in one way or another. scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740732 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668090] Review Request: rubygem-railties - Rails internals: application bootup, plugins, generators, and rake tasks.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668090
--- Comment #5 from Mohammed Morsi 2011-01-24 23:07:54 EST
---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc14.spec
> SRPM URL:
> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc14.src.rpm
>
> koji scratch build: FAIL
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740113
> build.log
> >>>
> Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.N6GfTX
> + umask 022
> + cd /builddir/build/BUILD
> + cd rubygem-railties-3.0.3
> + unset DISPLAY
> + pushd
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3
> ~/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3
> ~/build/BUILD/rubygem-railties-3.0.3
> + rake test
> rake aborted!
> (eval):1:in `read': No such file or directory -
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/RAILS_VERSION
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3/Rakefile:60
> (See full trace by running task with --trace)
> (in
> /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3)
> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.N6GfTX (%check)
> RPM build errors:
> Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.N6GfTX (%check)
> Child returncode was: 1
> <<<
>
The first line of railties.gemspec is causing the issue:
version = File.read(File.expand_path("../../RAILS_VERSION", FILE)).strip
You can probably just add a patch swapping this line out with "version = 3.0.3"
> Will you advise about 'BuildRequires:'
>
> I guess this is not full list:
> BuildRequires: rubygems
> BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = %{rubyabi}
> BuildRequires: rubygem(rake)
Usually if you have a %check section that runs a test suite, all the requires
should be listed as BuildRequires as well, as the runtime dependencies are
needed at build time. Thus rake, thor, activesupport, actionpack, etc should be
BuildRequires as well.
>
> (In reply to comment #3)
> > (In reply to comment #2)
>
> >
> > date isn't a rubygem. Its part of the ruby standard library. Same with
> > rbconfig. See
> >
> > /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/date.rb
> > /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux/rbconfig.rb
> >
> + Fixed.
>
>
> > Thanks alot. The find command doing so isn't just right though. Running it,
> > I
> > get
> >
> > "find: missing argument to `-exec'"
> >
> > To fix this append "{} \;" to the end of the find command like so:
> >
> > find ./%{geminstdir} -name *.css -type f -perm /a+x -exec chmod -v 644 {} \;
> >
> + Fixed.
>
> > >
> > > > rubygem-railties.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> > > > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/generators/rails/app/templates/test/fixtures/.empty_directory
> > > > rubygem-railties.noarch: E: zero-length
> > > > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/generators/rails/app/templates/test/fixtures/.empty_directory
>
> Is any way to lean these files? I'll prefer don't delete these file.
> I guess all 'empty folders' marked to avoid some variables have value = 'nil'
> by algorithm. We can have unstable side effects, IMHO.
> I'll test before at %check with deleted files.
>
Not fully following. If I understand, yes I also think that it'd probably just
be fine to leave these files in place for now to avoid any unintended side
effects.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672418] New: Review Request: fpdns - Fingerprint DNS
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: fpdns - Fingerprint DNS https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672418 Summary: Review Request: fpdns - Fingerprint DNS Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mmcki...@nexcess.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/fpdns/fpdns.spec SRPM: http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/fpdns/fpdns-0.9.3-1.fc14.src.rpm Scratch: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740694 Description: fpdns is a program that remotely determines DNS server versions. It does this by sending a series of borderline DNS queries which are compared against a table of responses and server versions. $ rpmlint fpdns-0.9.3-1.fc14.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint fpdns-0.9.3-1.fc14.src.rpm fpdns.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://fpdns.googlecode.com/files/Net-DNS-Fingerprint-0.9.3.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 590305] Review Request: vile - VI Like Emacs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=590305 --- Comment #4 from Mark McKinstry 2011-01-24 22:36:18 EST --- > As Jussi already suggested, I also think it's a good idea to build xvile too, > and put it into an optionally installable subpackage, e.g. vile-x11. Both vile > and xvile can share all data files and the filters. It shouldn't be > complicated > to extend the SPEC accordingly. This is now done. vile.spec creates three packages, vile, xvile, and vile-common. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740691 http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/vile/vile-9.8d-1.fc14.src.rpm http://mmckinst.nexcess.net/vile/vile.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 672395] New: Review Request: eigen3 - A lightweight C++ template library for vector and matrix math
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: eigen3 - A lightweight C++ template library for vector and matrix math https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672395 Summary: Review Request: eigen3 - A lightweight C++ template library for vector and matrix math Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: richmat...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/eigen3/eigen3.spec SRPM URL: http://rmattes.fedorapeople.org/RPMS/eigen3/eigen3-3.0-0.1.beta2.fc14.src.rpm Description: A lightweight C++ template library for vector and matrix math Since the package is a template library and doesn't include any compiled code, it only includes a noarch -devel package. I based it off of the specfile for the eigen2 package. rpmlint output: $ rpmlint eigen3.spec ../RPMS/noarch/eigen3* eigen3-devel.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/include/eigen3/Eigen/src/Sparse/SparseAssign.h 1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings. I think this error is alright, since another header file references it and removing the file would cause missing header errors. I could also edit the header that references the empty file and remove the reference. Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740673 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665005] Review Request: perl-Server-Starter - Superdaemon for hot-deploying server programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665005 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 20:50:21 EST --- perl-Server-Starter-0.11-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Server-Starter-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 665005] Review Request: perl-Server-Starter - Superdaemon for hot-deploying server programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665005 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 20:50:13 EST --- perl-Server-Starter-0.11-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Server-Starter-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 665005] Review Request: perl-Server-Starter - Superdaemon for hot-deploying server programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665005 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672365] New: Review Request: clutter-gtk010 - A basic GTK2 clutter widget
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: clutter-gtk010 - A basic GTK2 clutter widget https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672365 Summary: Review Request: clutter-gtk010 - A basic GTK2 clutter widget Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pbrobin...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Blocks: 620175 Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora SPEC: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/clutter-gtk010.spec SRPM: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/clutter-gtk010-0.10.8-3.fc15.src.rpm Description: This allows clutter to be embedded in GTK applications. We hope with further work in the future clutter-gtk will also allow the reverse, namely embedding GTK in Clutter This is a compat package for dependent packages that have yet to be ported gtk3. koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740483 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650667] Review Request: hitori - Hitori game for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650667 --- Comment #4 from Martin Gieseking 2011-01-24 17:55:37 EST --- Hi Mario, here are some initial comments on your package: - please choose a Summary that doesn't repeat the package name, e.g. something like "Logical number puzzle game for Gnome" - change the Group to Amusements/Games - according to the source file headers, the license is GPLv3+ - Source0 should contain a complete URL pointing to the upstream tarball - drop Requires: gtk because it's picked up automatically as a dependency - the package doesn't build in mock because of missing BuildRequires: intltool gnome-doc-utils - The %description lines should not exceed 80 characters per line. Just split them. - see here how to install the locales properly: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files - see here how to install the desktop file properly: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop - Your package currently owns the directory /usr/share/icons/hicolor (and the folders below). These folders are already owned by package hicolor-icon-theme. Thus, add hicolor-icon-theme package as a dependency and only add the image files in %files. - add the release number to the version in the %changelog headers: 0.2.5-1 $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-14-x86_64/result/*.rpm hitori.src: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Hitori hitori.src: E: description-line-too-long C Hitori is a small application written to allow one to play the eponymous puzzle game, which is similar in theme to more popular puzzles such as Sudoku. hitori.src: E: description-line-too-long C It depends on GTK+ 2.13 and Cairo 1.4, and has full support for playing the game (i.e. it checks all three rules are satisfied). It has undo/redo support, can give hints, and allows for cells to be tagged with one of two different tags, to aid in solving the puzzle. It has support for anything from 5×5 to 10×10 grids. hitori.src: W: non-standard-group Games hitori.src: W: invalid-url Source0: hitori-0.2.5.tar.bz2 hitori.x86_64: W: name-repeated-in-summary C Hitori hitori.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C Hitori is a small application written to allow one to play the eponymous puzzle game, which is similar in theme to more popular puzzles such as Sudoku. hitori.x86_64: E: description-line-too-long C It depends on GTK+ 2.13 and Cairo 1.4, and has full support for playing the game (i.e. it checks all three rules are satisfied). It has undo/redo support, can give hints, and allows for cells to be tagged with one of two different tags, to aid in solving the puzzle. It has support for anything from 5×5 to 10×10 grids. hitori.x86_64: W: non-standard-group Games hitori.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.2.5 ['0.2.5-1.fc14', '0.2.5-1'] hitori.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hitori hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/el/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/en_GB/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/gl/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/hu/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/id/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/nb/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pa/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pt_BR/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sl/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/sv/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo hitori.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/zh_CN/LC_MESSAGES/hitori.mo 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 23 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 517462] Review Request: voicedata-zh_TW-gcin-EdwardLiu - Chinese voice data from gcin project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517462 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 17:42:51 EST --- It was brought before the packaging committee quite some time ago. We had questions and suggestions but nobody ever answered them. This review's been sitting around ever since. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 667954] Review Request: rubygem-arel - Arel is a Relational Algebra for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667954 --- Comment #6 from Mohammed Morsi 2011-01-24 16:59:12 EST --- Created attachment 475056 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=475056 error building activerecord 3.0.3 against arel 2.0.6 $ gem list *** LOCAL GEMS *** activemodel (3.0.3) activesupport (3.0.3) arel (2.0.6) builder (2.1.2) hoe (2.6.2) i18n (0.4.2) json (1.4.3) minitest (1.6.0) mocha (0.9.8) rake (0.8.7) rubyforge (2.0.4) sqlite3-ruby (1.2.4) tzinfo (0.3.24) All installed via yum from Fedora and the locally built copies. When I build the rubygem-activerecord package with the following spec http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-activerecord.spec Changing the arel dependency to 2.0.6, I get the attached errors in the activerecord spec suite -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671030] Review Request: dogtag-pki-theme - Certificate System, Dogtag PKI Theme Components
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671030 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 16:54:42 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656010] Review Request: libsrtp - An implementation of the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656010 --- Comment #13 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 16:46:43 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 551411] Review Request: olpc-os-builder - OLPC OS image build utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551411 --- Comment #11 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 16:46:29 EST --- There's no such branch as "rawhide". 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 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 #10 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 16:47:02 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 634911] Review Request: nodejs - Evented I/O for v8 JavaScript
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634911 --- Comment #14 from Damian Wrobel 2011-01-24 16:22:07 EST --- (In reply to comment #13) > If someone is following this ticket, please answer :) Patrice, I've posted comments to the Lubomir's spec file in the comment #8, if you're going to take over this request it would have to be reviewed by someone else who could sponsor you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 517849] Review Request: mpiwrappers - Environment module wrappers for MPI packages in RHEL
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=517849 Jussi Lehtola changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-01-24 16:07:56 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 #12 from Mohammed Morsi 2011-01-24 16:07:50 EST --- OK in this case please, * remove the bits splitting the LICENSE out of the README and * add the missing BuildRequires dependencies to the spec (you will need to pull the upstream Gemfile and downgrade the ZenTest dependency there) After these two I will approve. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 664982] Review Request: perl-Parallel-Prefork - Simple prefork server 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=664982 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 16:00:21 EST --- perl-Parallel-Prefork-0.11-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update perl-Parallel-Prefork'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Parallel-Prefork-0.11-1.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 668098] Review Request: rubygem-tzinfo - Ruby library that uses the standard tz (Olson) database to provide daylight savings aware transformations between times in different time zones.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668098
Mohammed Morsi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Mohammed Morsi 2011-01-24 15:59:36 EST
---
To run the test suite, simply add the following to the spec
%check
pushd %{buildroot}%{geminstdir}
rake test
You will also need to add "BuildRequires: rubygem(rake)"
Up to you though, this is not required for approval, and I've verified the test
suite works against this rpm in any case.
The package looks to be Fedora compliant overall minus one nit, please remove
the "rm -rf %{buildroot}" in the %install section.
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 624020] Review Request: libbluedevil - A Qt wrapper for bluez
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624020 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||libbluedevil-1.8-3.fc14 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 667781] Add iwl6000g2b-firmware - Firmware for Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 6030 Series Adapters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667781 --- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 15:58:22 EST --- iwl6000g2b-firmware-17.168.5.1-1.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 624020] Review Request: libbluedevil - A Qt wrapper for bluez
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=624020 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 16:00:28 EST --- libbluedevil-1.8-3.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 667781] Add iwl6000g2b-firmware - Firmware for Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 6030 Series Adapters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667781 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||iwl6000g2b-firmware-17.168. ||5.1-1.fc14 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-01-24 15:58:27 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 667997] Review Request: rubygem-rack-mount - Stackable dynamic tree based Rack router
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667997
Mohammed Morsi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Mohammed Morsi 2011-01-24 15:49:42 EST
---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Please see updated package:
>
> Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-rack-mount.spec
> SRPM URL:
> http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-rack-mount-0.6.13-2.fc14.src.rpm
>
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > Will take this one
> >
> > * $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/rubygem-rack-mount-*
> > rpmbuild/SRPMS/rubygem-rack-mount-0.6.13-1.fc14.src.rpm | grep -v
> > unexpanded-macro
> > rubygem-rack-mount.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
> > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean
> > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
> > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-%prep-section
> > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-%build-section
> > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-%clean-section
> > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 76 warnings.
> >
> > Can you add the missing sections (prep, build, clean), the other warnings
> > can
> > be ignored
> >
>
> I have added missing sections
Looks good.
>
> > * Missing dependency, shouldn't rubygem(rack) be a Requires
> >
> > http://rubygems.org/gems/rack-mount
> >
>
> Added missing dependencies
Looks good.
>
> > * MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries, rack-mount
> > vendorizes the multimap and regin gems, these need to be separated into
> > their
> > own rpms
>
> Bundled gems removed and added dependencies instead.
Hrm, the code you added to the specfile doesn't quite accomplish this, instead
of the "rm -rf gems/..." line you need
"rm -rf %{buildroot}%{geminstdir}/lib/rack/mount/vendor"
I've verified it builds and the test suite still works as intended after this
fix.
>
> >
> > * Koji build is green:
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2730211
> >
> > * Feel free to tar up the upstream test suite and Rakefile and include and
> > run
> > them in the rpm's check section. Not a requirement for approval though.
>
> Test suite is executed now during build. Note, however, that the test suite is
> not bundled into resulting package.
Thanks, though I'm getting the following error when I run this:
mkdir /var/tmp/rack-mount-0.6.13
mkdir: cannot create directory `/var/tmp/rack-mount-0.6.13': File exists
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.3WMbc3 (%check)
The following accomplishes the same thing and works locally
%check
pushd %{buildroot}%{gemdir}
tar xzvf %{SOURCE1}
ruby -rrubygems -I%{buildroot}%{geminstdir}/lib -I./test /usr/bin/testrb
test/test_*
rm -rf test/
popd
>
> > Other than that, looks good, thanks for this
>
> I cannot provide Koji build results as long as the dependencies are not
> satisfied. However, if everything goes well, the package should be prepared
> already.
I've verified it builds in a F14 mock environment w/ the regin and multimap
gems pre installed.
Once you make the two changes above (correct the "rm -rf" command to remove
vendorized libs and fix the %check section so that it doesn't throw error) 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 646836] Review Request: rubygem-bundler - The best way to manage your application's dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646836 --- Comment #12 from Vít Ondruch 2011-01-24 15:39:31 EST --- Hm, this is evolving in some unexpected way :/ https://github.com/carlhuda/bundler/issues/issue/982/#issue/982/comment/703782 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 513320] Review Request: boxbackup - A fast, secure and automatic online backup system
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=513320 --- Comment #23 from Stewart Adam 2011-01-24 15:27:35 EST --- Sorry about the delays, I've investigated the license problem and upload an updated package up soon. For Fedora it looks like it will be only GPLv2+ with exceptions, since the compiles include lib/backupclient which (among others) is GPLv2+ only. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656010] Review Request: libsrtp - An implementation of the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656010 Jeffrey C. Ollie changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656010] Review Request: libsrtp - An implementation of the Secure Real-time Transport Protocol (SRTP)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656010 --- Comment #12 from Jeffrey C. Ollie 2011-01-24 15:23:06 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libsrtp New Branches: el6 Owners: jcollie InitialCC: Wanted for Asterisk SRTP support. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672322] New: Review Request: python26-boto - A simple lightweight interface to Amazon Web Services
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python26-boto - A simple lightweight interface to Amazon Web Services https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672322 Summary: Review Request: python26-boto - A simple lightweight interface to Amazon Web Services Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: gho...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Note to reviewer: This package provides a copy of Fedora's python-boto package built against Python 2.6 so it works on el5. el6 and Fedora will remain unaffected since they can use existing packages. Spec URL: http://gholms.fedorapeople.org/packages/el5/python26-boto-2.0-0.1.b3.spec SRPM URL: http://gholms.fedorapeople.org/packages/el5/source/python26-boto-2.0-0.1.b3.el5.src.rpm Description: Boto is a Python package that provides interfaces to Amazon Web Services. It supports S3 (Simple Storage Service), SQS (Simple Queue Service) via the REST API's provided by those services and EC2 (Elastic Compute Cloud) via the Query API. The goal of boto is to provide a very simple, easy to use, lightweight wrapper around the Amazon services. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 650667] Review Request: hitori - Hitori game for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650667 --- Comment #3 from mariobl 2011-01-24 15:14:56 EST --- Sorry for the delay. Now I have my Fedora machine back. The src.rpm is now available from here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/19373040/Fedora/hitori-0.2.5-1.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672318] New: Review Request: python26-m2crypto - Support for using OpenSSL in python scripts
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python26-m2crypto - Support for using OpenSSL in python scripts https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672318 Summary: Review Request: python26-m2crypto - Support for using OpenSSL in python scripts Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: gho...@fedoraproject.org QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Note to reviewer: This package provides a copy of the standard m2crypto package that is built against Python 2.6. It is intended solely for el5. Spec URL: http://gholms.fedorapeople.org/packages/el5/python26-m2crypto-0.20.2-9.spec SRPM URL: http://gholms.fedorapeople.org/packages/el5/source/python26-m2crypto-0.20.2-9.el5.src.rpm Description: This package allows you to call OpenSSL functions from python scripts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630754] Review Request: mscgen - Message Sequence Chart Rendering tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630754 --- Comment #11 from Martin Gieseking 2011-01-24 15:03:18 EST --- Michael, have you already done some informal reviews of other packager's submissions? If not, I'd encourage you to do so in order to show your understanding of the packaging guidelines. This is an important part of the sponsoring process. For further information have a look at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 668090] Review Request: rubygem-railties - Rails internals: application bootup, plugins, generators, and rake tasks.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668090
--- Comment #4 from Minnikhanov 2011-01-24 14:57:35 EST
---
Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc14.spec
SRPM URL:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/14118661/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc14.src.rpm
koji scratch build: FAIL
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740113
build.log
>>>
Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.N6GfTX
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ cd rubygem-railties-3.0.3
+ unset DISPLAY
+ pushd
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3
~/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3
~/build/BUILD/rubygem-railties-3.0.3
+ rake test
rake aborted!
(eval):1:in `read': No such file or directory -
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/RAILS_VERSION
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3/Rakefile:60
(See full trace by running task with --trace)
(in
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/rubygem-railties-3.0.3-3.fc15.noarch/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3)
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.N6GfTX (%check)
RPM build errors:
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.N6GfTX (%check)
Child returncode was: 1
<<<
Will you advise about 'BuildRequires:'
I guess this is not full list:
BuildRequires: rubygems
BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = %{rubyabi}
BuildRequires: rubygem(rake)
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
>
> date isn't a rubygem. Its part of the ruby standard library. Same with
> rbconfig. See
>
> /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/date.rb
> /usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i386-linux/rbconfig.rb
>
+ Fixed.
> Thanks alot. The find command doing so isn't just right though. Running it, I
> get
>
> "find: missing argument to `-exec'"
>
> To fix this append "{} \;" to the end of the find command like so:
>
> find ./%{geminstdir} -name *.css -type f -perm /a+x -exec chmod -v 644 {} \;
>
+ Fixed.
> >
> > > rubygem-railties.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> > > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/generators/rails/app/templates/test/fixtures/.empty_directory
> > > rubygem-railties.noarch: E: zero-length
> > > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/railties-3.0.3/lib/rails/generators/rails/app/templates/test/fixtures/.empty_directory
Is any way to lean these files? I'll prefer don't delete these file.
I guess all 'empty folders' marked to avoid some variables have value = 'nil'
by algorithm. We can have unstable side effects, IMHO.
I'll test before at %check with deleted files.
> > >
> > > There are a bunch of these errors for various .empty_directory files in
> > > the
> > > railties gem, these need to be included in the project correct?
> > >
> > I delete these files in %prep. (??? - my opinion).
> > I guess its need for generator as some mark. I look at source.
> > No empty folder here lib/rails/generators/rails/app/templates/*
> > This need addition info.
> >
>
> They do seem to be in the upstream source, see for example
>
> https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/railties/lib/rails/generators/rails/generator/templates/templates/.empty_directory
>
> It might not be a bad idea to lean on the safe side and leave them included.
> Or
> at the very least, ensure the test suite works w/ those files removed.
>
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670541] Review Request: libxc - Library of exchange and correlation functionals to be used in DFT codes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670541 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 14:49:52 EST --- libxc-1.0-4.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libxc-1.0-4.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 670541] Review Request: libxc - Library of exchange and correlation functionals to be used in DFT codes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670541 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670541] Review Request: libxc - Library of exchange and correlation functionals to be used in DFT codes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670541 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 14:50:06 EST --- libxc-1.0-4.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libxc-1.0-4.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670541] Review Request: libxc - Library of exchange and correlation functionals to be used in DFT codes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670541 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 14:49:44 EST --- libxc-1.0-4.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libxc-1.0-4.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 670541] Review Request: libxc - Library of exchange and correlation functionals to be used in DFT codes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670541 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 14:49:59 EST --- libxc-1.0-4.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libxc-1.0-4.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 672136] Review Request: rubygem-multimap - Ruby multimap implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672136
Mohammed Morsi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #3 from Mohammed Morsi 2011-01-24 14:40:59 EST
---
Hey thanks for the review / approval. Incorporated your feedback into an
updated version
SPEC: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-multimap.spec
SRPM: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-multimap-1.1.2-2.fc14.src.rpm
Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2740138
(In reply to comment #2)
> * Package looks good, rpmlint looks good, passes the review guidelines.
>
> * Cleaning
> - "rm -rf %{buildroot}" at the top of %install, %clean section
> are no longer needed:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean
>
Done.
> * Splitting out document files
> - Please consider to create -doc subpackage and move the following
> files / directories into -doc
>
> %doc %{gemdir}/doc/%{gemname}-%{version}
> %doc %{geminstdir}/Rakefile
> %doc %{geminstdir}/spec
> %doc %{geminstdir}/%{gemname}.gemspec
>
>
Done.
> * Test execution
> - Please consider test execution just using "spec spec/" instead of "rake
> spec".
> This would allow to omit the Rakefile and .gemspec as well as build
> dependency on Rake.
>
Done.
>
> However, neither of this is blocker:
>
> APPROVED
New Package SCM Request
===
Package Name: rubygem-multimap
Short Description: Ruby multimap implementation
Owners: mmorsi
Branches:
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672246] Review Request: perl-Statistics-Basic - A collection of very basic statistics modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672246 Marcela Mašláňová changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Marcela Mašláňová 2011-01-24 14:28:45 EST --- Ok, ACCEPT -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671030] Review Request: dogtag-pki-theme - Certificate System, Dogtag PKI Theme Components
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671030 Kevin Wright changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Kevin Wright 2011-01-24 13:23:51 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: dogtag-pki-theme Short Description: Certificate System - Dogtag PKI Theme Components Owners: kwright Branches: F-13, F-14, EL-5 InitialCC: ausil -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665189] Review Request: perl-Convert-Color - Color space conversions and named lookups
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665189 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 13:09:20 EST --- perl-Convert-Color-0.07-2.fc13 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 13. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Convert-Color-0.07-2.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 665189] Review Request: perl-Convert-Color - Color space conversions and named lookups
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665189 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 13:09:14 EST --- perl-Convert-Color-0.07-2.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/perl-Convert-Color-0.07-2.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 669010] Review Request: libfap - C port of Ham::APRS::FAP APRS Parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669010 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 13:02:58 EST --- libfap-1.0-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update libfap'. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libfap-1.0-3.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 551411] Review Request: olpc-os-builder - OLPC OS image build utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551411 Daniel Drake changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Daniel Drake 2011-01-24 12:47:33 EST --- Thanks Peter. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: olpc-os-builder Short Description: A development tool to build and customize OLPC OS images Owners: dsd pbrobinson cjb Branches: rawhide 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 672015] Review Request: perl-Eval-Closure - Safely and cleanly create closures via string eval
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672015 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:46:45 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 630261] Review Request: ghc-bytestring-nums - Parse numeric literals from ByteStrings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630261 --- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:43:56 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 670558] Review Request: ape - A tool for generating atomic pseudopotentials within a DFT 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=670558 --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:45:33 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 670701] Review Request: ghc-ansi-terminal - Haskell ansi-terminal 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=670701 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:45:59 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 661615] Review Request: bamf - Application matching 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=661615 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:44:11 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 670164] Review Request: sonatype-oss-parent - Sonatype OSS Parent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670164 --- Comment #6 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:44:44 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 670930] Review Request: rubygem-regin - Ruby Regexp Introspection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670930 --- Comment #4 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:46:12 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 665005] Review Request: perl-Server-Starter - Superdaemon for hot-deploying server programs
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=665005 --- Comment #8 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:44:28 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 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 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 671079] Review Request: sblim-smis-hba - SBLIM SMIS HBA HDR Providers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671079 --- Comment #5 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:46:30 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 670541] Review Request: libxc - Library of exchange and correlation functionals to be used in DFT codes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670541 --- Comment #9 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-01-24 12:45:06 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 672284] New: Review Request: perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple - Count packages, subs, lines, etc. of many files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple - Count packages, subs, lines, etc. of many files https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672284 Summary: Review Request: perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple - Count packages, subs, lines, etc. of many files Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ppi...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple/perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple/perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple-0.15-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: Perl::Metrics::Simple provides just enough methods to run static analysis of one or many Perl files and obtain a few metrics: packages, subroutines, lines of code, and an approximation of cyclomatic (McCabe) complexity for the subroutines and the "main" portion of the code. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672284] Review Request: perl-Perl-Metrics-Simple - Count packages, subs, lines, etc. of many 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=672284 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||672246 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672246] Review Request: perl-Statistics-Basic - A collection of very basic statistics modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672246 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||672284 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 646836] Review Request: rubygem-bundler - The best way to manage your application's dependencies
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=646836 --- Comment #11 from Vít Ondruch 2011-01-24 12:23:54 EST --- Hello, I am taking over this gem from jzigmund (right Jozef?). So here is update of the package: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-bundler.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-bundler-1.0.9-1.fc14.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2739694 * I have bumped the specs to the latest Bundler. * I have added installation of manual pages. Unfortunately, I was not able to execute specs during build for 2 reasons: 1) The spec is RSpec 2 based, so there are some minor differences, however not a show stopper. 2) The removed vendorized Thor makes serious problems during testing. I wanted to run the specs against Thor installed as an dependency, however, there is heavily modificated the ruby load path during specs runtime, in the way, that manually specified path to external Thor is lost. Also note that there is some strange relation between Thor and Bundler. I have reported this issue upstream: https://github.com/carlhuda/bundler/issues/#issue/982 Nonetheless, non of this issues should prevent us from releasing this gem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 225888] Merge Review: hsqldb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225888
--- Comment #5 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2011-01-24
12:17:39 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
hsqldb.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlets -> servants,
serviettes, serviette
hsqldb.noarch: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/maven/fragments/hsqldb
hsqldb.noarch: W: dangling-symlink /var/lib/hsqldb/lib/servlet.jar
/usr/share/java/servlet.jar
This file doesn't seem to be provided by servlet25 package
(tomcat6-servlet-2.5-api in our case). This is mostly likely a bug in
tomcat6 that should be fixed together with providing
java/servlet25.jar so that `build-classpath servlet25` will work.
hsqldb.noarch: E: non-readable /var/lib/hsqldb/sqltool.rc 0600L
hsqldb.noarch: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/lib/hsqldb/data 0700L
hsqldb.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hsqldbRunUtil
No problem, explained before
hsqldb.noarch: E: subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/hsqldb
This seems to suggest that you should use /var/lock/subsys/ directory
for creating and managing lock file. Hsqldb init script seems to
contain PIDFILE definitions..maybe changing that would fix the rpmlint
warnings? FYI, I don't know of any rule against using upstream init
script as long as it works, and I am guessing you have better things
to do than to solve non-existent bugs :-)
hsqldb.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US servlets -> servants,
serviettes, serviette
hsqldb.src: W: strange-permission hsqldb-1.8.0-standard.cfg 0755L
655?
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: BSD
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
-demo sub-package requires main package but still has license (no need to)
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: e0d6144108fc05e355bb19684ac4c83a
MD5SUM upstream package: e0d6144108fc05e355bb19684ac4c83a
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[!] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
This is missing
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[-] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_to_maven_depmap call which resolves to the pom
file (use "JPP." and "JPP-" correctly)
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven2.jpp.depmap.file=*" explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package uses %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages have Requires(post) and Requires(po
[Bug 672246] Review Request: perl-Statistics-Basic - A collection of very basic statistics modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672246 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar 2011-01-24 11:46:08 EST --- > * I dislike your description, but that's nothing better on upstream page. The description is content of README. Main module POD has not short description. > * Shouldn't be also perl(Statistics::Basic) provided without version? This could be blocker for other packages requiring any other release. I think the Provides and Requires RPM atoms has structure SYMBOL RELATION VERSION and that Requires equaled to SYMBOL is satisfied regardless RELATION and VERSION values or existence. E.g. $ rpm -q --provides glibc |grep glibc config(glibc) = 2.13-1 glibc = 2.13-1 glibc(x86-64) = 2.13-1 does not provides `glibc' atom only. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 533167] Review Request: emacs-ecb - Emacs Code Browser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=533167
Karel Klíč changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status Whiteboard|NotReady|
--- Comment #12 from Karel Klíč 2011-01-24 11:45:54 EST ---
Yes, thanks, it also works for me on Fedora 14 -- removing the NotReady tag.
I have prepared a new version.
Spec URL: http://kklic.fedorapeople.org/emacs-ecb.spec
SRPM URL:
http://kklic.fedorapeople.org/emacs-ecb-2.40-0.3.cvs20101021.fc13.src.rpm
* Mon Jan 24 2011 Karel Klic - 2.40.1-0.3.cvs20101021
- Removed BuildRoot tag
- Used mkdir, install instead of %%{__mkdir_p}, %%{__install}
- Do not install docs into build root
- Removed %%clean section
- Replaced local %%{emacs_*} macros with global ones
- Improved description
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 225888] Merge Review: hsqldb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225888 --- Comment #4 from Stanislav Ochotnicky 2011-01-24 11:42:01 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > > [!] Package contains code, or permissable content. > > [!] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present. > Are there problems with these 2? No, obviously just a typo on my side, otherwise there would be accompanying text. I'll do second round of review in a while. -- 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 672246] Review Request: perl-Statistics-Basic - A collection of very basic statistics modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672246
Marcela Mašláňová changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmasl...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová 2011-01-24 11:28:23
EST ---
- rpmlint OK
- package must be named according to Guidelines OK
- spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK
- package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK
- package must be licensed with Fedora approved license OK
- license field must match actual license OK
- text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK
- sources must match the upstream source OK
- package MUST successfully compile and build OK
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2739487
- architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK
- build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires OK
- handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK
- shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK
- packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK
- package must own all directories that it creates OK
- permissions on files must be set properly OK
- package must consistently use macros OK
- package must contain code, or permissable content OK
- large documentation must go in a -doc OK
- %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK
- header files must be in a -devel package OK
- static libraries must be in a -static package OK
- library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK
- devel package usually require base package OK
- packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK
- GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK
- packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK
rpm -qp --provides perl-Statistics-Basic-1.6602-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
perl(Statistics::Basic) = 1.6602
perl(Statistics::Basic::ComputedVector)
perl(Statistics::Basic::Correlation)
perl(Statistics::Basic::Covariance)
perl(Statistics::Basic::LeastSquareFit)
perl(Statistics::Basic::Mean)
perl(Statistics::Basic::Median)
perl(Statistics::Basic::Mode)
perl(Statistics::Basic::_OneVectorBase)
perl(Statistics::Basic::StdDev)
perl(Statistics::Basic::_TwoVectorBase)
perl(Statistics::Basic::Variance)
perl(Statistics::Basic::Vector)
perl-Statistics-Basic = 1.6602-1.fc14
rpm -qp --requires perl-Statistics-Basic-1.6602-1.fc14.noarch.rpm
perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.12.2)
perl(Number::Format) >= 1.42
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1
perl(base)
perl(Carp)
perl(Scalar::Util)
perl(Statistics::Basic)
perl(strict)
perl(warnings)
rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) <= 3.0.3-1
Comments:
* I dislike your description, but that's nothing better on upstream page.
* Shouldn't be also perl(Statistics::Basic) provided without version? This
could be blocker for other packages requiring any other release.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656186] Review Request: drupal6-mimedetect - MimeDetect provides an API for consistent server side mime detection
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656186 --- Comment #2 from Peter Borsa 2011-01-24 11:32:40 EST --- http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-mimedetect.spec http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-mimedetect-1.3-2.fc14.src.rpm Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656179] Review Request: drupal6-imagecache - ImageCache allows you to setup presets for image processing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656179 --- Comment #3 from Peter Borsa 2011-01-24 11:28:43 EST --- http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-imagecache.spec http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-imagecache-2.0-0.2.beta10.fc14.src.rpm Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656017] Review Request: drupal6-imagefield - ImageField provides an image upload field for CCK
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656017 --- Comment #2 from Peter Borsa 2011-01-24 11:23:21 EST --- http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-imagefield.spec http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-imagefield-3.7-2.fc14.src.rpm Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656182] Review Request: drupal6-imageapi - This API is meant to be used in place of the API provided by image.inc
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656182 --- Comment #3 from Peter Borsa 2011-01-24 11:18:51 EST --- http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-imageapi.spec http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-imageapi-1.9-2.fc14.src.rpm Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656160] Review Request: drupal6-filefield - FileField provides a universal file upload field for CCK
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656160 --- Comment #2 from Peter Borsa 2011-01-24 11:14:56 EST --- http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-filefield.spec http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal6-filefield-3.7-2.fc14.src.rpm Fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518546] Review Request: libva - VAAPI video playback acceleration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518546 --- Comment #75 from Adam Williamson 2011-01-24 10:48:16 EST --- "Please do not Obsoletes libva-freeworld. This package will still be needed since '3rd repo' rely on the Splitted Desktop version which is binary incompatible with the Freedesktop version." I don't think libva-freeworld is an appropriate package name for a build of the SDS fork. "Note that the vdpau-video package does indeed mandatory requires the SD version." You keep saying that, but I haven't seen any proof; I'm pretty sure I built vdpau-video against upstream libva already...Gwenole himself told me there's almost no point to the SDS fork except Poulsbo, now. "And for the record, as the hardware support range for this package is currently shorter than the SD version, that's unlikely that packages provided by '3rd repo' will link to this version." Honestly, there's a limit to how long we can carry around an obsolete library just to make poulsbo's shitty driver happy, and I say that as the maintainer of poulsbo's shitty driver... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671079] Review Request: sblim-smis-hba - SBLIM SMIS HBA HDR Providers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671079 Vitezslav Crhonek changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Vitezslav Crhonek 2011-01-24 10:29:05 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: sblim-smis-hba Short Description: SMI-S standards based HBA CMPI Providers Owners: vcrhonek Branches: f13 f14 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672246] New: Review Request: perl-Statistics-Basic - A collection of very basic statistics modules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: perl-Statistics-Basic - A collection of very basic statistics modules https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672246 Summary: Review Request: perl-Statistics-Basic - A collection of very basic statistics modules Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ppi...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Statistics-Basic/perl-Statistics-Basic.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Statistics-Basic/perl-Statistics-Basic-1.6602-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: use Statistics::Basic qw(:all); my $median = median( 1,2,3 ); my $mean = mean( [1,2,3]); # array refs are ok too my $variance = variance( 1,2,3 ); my $stddev = stddev( 1,2,3 ); my $correlation = correlation( [1 .. 3], [1 .. 3] ); -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671079] Review Request: sblim-smis-hba - SBLIM SMIS HBA HDR Providers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671079
Ondrej Vasik changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Ondrej Vasik 2011-01-24 09:28:07 EST ---
OK source files match upstream:
$sha256sum sblim-smis-hba-1.0.0.tar.bz*
0b285a3a3fa0efbb50386f5943adb59d8bb8891f923e57725303290d91aa486b
sblim-smis-hba-1.0.0.tar.bz2
0b285a3a3fa0efbb50386f5943adb59d8bb8891f923e57725303290d91aa486b
sblim-smis-hba-1.0.0.tar.bz2.orig
Just for record, sha256sums of other checked components:
$sha256sum sblim-smis-hba.spec sblim-smis-hba-1.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm
4939109c369557a85d76d87c4e4a0b83b3d74ebb0b5b24fa1232712681161f86
sblim-smis-hba.spec
84eb31bb37af4f8f25c58770e253658d6920bf81bb0d734708d96dd986780531
sblim-smis-hba-1.0.0-1.fc14.src.rpm
OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
OK specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros
consistently.
OK dist tag is present.
OK license field matches the actual license.
EPL
OK license is open source-compatible. License text included in package.
EPL
OK latest version is being packaged.
OK BuildRequires are proper.
OK compiler flags are appropriate.
OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/i686).
OK debuginfo package looks complete.
BAD rpmlint is silent.
$rpmlint sblim-smis-hba.spec sblim-smis-hba*.rpm
sblim-smis-hba.spec:48: W: rpm-buildroot-usage %build
LDFLAGS="-L${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_libdir}/cmpi";
sblim-smis-hba.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/cmpi/libcmpiLinux_ECTP_Provider.so
sblim-smis-hba.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/cmpi/libcmpiSMIS_HBA_HDR_Provider.so
sblim-smis-hba.i686: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package
/usr/lib/cmpi/libcmpiLinux_Common.so
sblim-smis-hba.src:48: W: rpm-buildroot-usage %build
LDFLAGS="-L${RPM_BUILD_ROOT}%{_libdir}/cmpi";
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings.
We can ignore devel-file-in-non-devel-package - package is primarily for IBM
development and it makes no sense to have -devel subpackage in it. Second
warning could be ignored, it is intentional (we can't use paralel build because
of this as well) - some libraries are built at build time and used for the
build of the others.
OK final provides and requires look sane.
N/A %check is present and all tests pass.
N/A shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths with
proper scriptlets
OK owns the directories it creates.
OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
OK no duplicates in %files.
OK file permissions are appropriate.
OK correct scriptlets present.
OK code, not content.
OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
N/A headers in -devel
N/A pkgconfig files in -devel
OK no libtool .la droppings.
OK not a GUI app.
OK obsoletes and provides of the obsoleted package are valid
Package looks sane for me now, 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 667954] Review Request: rubygem-arel - Arel is a Relational Algebra for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667954 --- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch 2011-01-24 09:26:07 EST --- (In reply to comment #3) > * It turns out only rubygem-arel 2.0.2 is compatible w/ rails 3.0.3. Anything > above that will cause errors in activerecord. Would you consider submitting > arel 2.0.2 instead? How did you tested please? This is list of gems I have on my system: [vondruch@dhcp-25-1 activerecord ((v3.0.3) *)]$ gem list *** LOCAL GEMS *** abstract (1.0.0) actionmailer (3.0.3) actionpack (3.0.3) activemodel (3.0.3) activerecord (3.0.3) activeresource (3.0.3) activesupport (3.0.3) addressable (2.2.3) archive-tar-minitar (0.5.2) arel (2.0.7) builder (2.1.2) bundler (1.0.9) columnize (0.3.1) erubis (2.6.6) faker (0.9.4) gem2rpm (0.6.0) horo (1.0.3) i18n (0.5.0) json (1.4.3) linecache (0.43) mail (2.2.14) memcache-client (1.8.5) mime-types (1.16) mocha (0.9.8) nokogiri (1.4.3.1) polyglot (0.3.1) rack (1.2.1) rack-mount (0.6.13) rack-test (0.5.7) rails (3.0.3) railties (3.0.3) rake (0.8.7) rbench (0.2.3) rdoc (3.4) ruby-debug (0.10.4) ruby-debug-base (0.10.4) ruby-prof (0.9.2) ruby_core_source (0.1.4) sqlite3 (1.3.3) sqlite3-ruby (1.3.3) system_timer (1.0) text-format (1.0.0) text-hyphen (1.0.0) thor (0.14.6) treetop (1.4.9) tzinfo (0.3.24) yajl-ruby (0.7.9) and running: [vondruch@dhcp-25-1 activerecord ((v3.0.3) *)]$ rake test_sqlite3 produces no error: Finished in 402.826755 seconds. 2380 tests, 7383 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #11 from Minnikhanov 2011-01-24 08:56:14 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) > (In reply to comment #7) > > (In reply to comment #6) > > > * passes review guidelines (would be good to get a separate LICENSE file > > > from > > > upstream, but is not required) > This is not what I meant. I merely was suggesting you contact upstream to > include the separate LICENSE file as directed here > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text > > Since this is a SHOULD it isn't a blocker for the package being accepted. > Publish issue at upstream https://github.com/mikel/mail/issues#issue/190 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 671079] Review Request: sblim-smis-hba - SBLIM SMIS HBA HDR Providers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671079 --- Comment #2 from Vitezslav Crhonek 2011-01-24 08:20:07 EST --- (In reply to comment #1) > First iteration of review: > please, use %global instead of %define macros - see > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define Fixed. > > you could drop BuildRoot, it is no longer necessary... > comment about Patch4 but no Patch4 ... cleanup neeeded? This comment is about Patch0 - fixed. > > I see only AUTHORS COPYING and README - why you don't use %doc macro for them? > It would give user a chance to install rpm without documentation. Fixed. > > .c/.h files in srpm have strange permissions 755. Have you considered -devel > subpackage? Or it is not expected someone except IBM could use the API for > development? -devel subpackage is not necessary. No .c/.h files are shipped. In case that someone will need -devel subpackage, I'll create it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656190] Review Request: drupal6-pathauto - The Pathauto module automatically generates path aliases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656190 Volker Fröhlich changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 667997] Review Request: rubygem-rack-mount - Stackable dynamic tree based Rack router
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=667997 --- Comment #3 from Vít Ondruch 2011-01-24 08:06:40 EST --- Please see updated package: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-rack-mount.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-rack-mount-0.6.13-2.fc14.src.rpm (In reply to comment #2) > Will take this one > > * $ rpmlint rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/rubygem-rack-mount-* > rpmbuild/SRPMS/rubygem-rack-mount-0.6.13-1.fc14.src.rpm | grep -v > unexpanded-macro > rubygem-rack-mount.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-cleaning-of-buildroot %clean > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-buildroot-tag > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-%prep-section > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-%build-section > rubygem-rack-mount.src: W: no-%clean-section > 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 76 warnings. > > Can you add the missing sections (prep, build, clean), the other warnings can > be ignored > I have added missing sections > * Missing dependency, shouldn't rubygem(rack) be a Requires > > http://rubygems.org/gems/rack-mount > Added missing dependencies > * MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries, rack-mount > vendorizes the multimap and regin gems, these need to be separated into their > own rpms Bundled gems removed and added dependencies instead. > > * Koji build is green: > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2730211 > > * Feel free to tar up the upstream test suite and Rakefile and include and run > them in the rpm's check section. Not a requirement for approval though. Test suite is executed now during build. Note, however, that the test suite is not bundled into resulting package. > Other than that, looks good, thanks for this I cannot provide Koji build results as long as the dependencies are not satisfied. However, if everything goes well, the package should be prepared 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 672221] New: Review Request: sqlite3-dbf - Converter of XBase / FoxPro tables to SQLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: sqlite3-dbf - Converter of XBase / FoxPro tables to SQLite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672221 Summary: Review Request: sqlite3-dbf - Converter of XBase / FoxPro tables to SQLite Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pa...@hubbitus.info QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora13/sqlite3-dbf/sqlite3-dbf.spec SRPM URL: http://hubbitus.net.ru/rpm/Fedora13/sqlite3-dbf/sqlite3-dbf-2011.01.24-1.fc13.src.rpm Description: SQLiteDBF converts XBase databases, particularly FoxPro tables with memo files, into a SQL dump. It has no dependencies other than standard Unix libraries. SQLiteDBF is designed to be incredibly fast and as efficient as possible. This use code base of the PgDBF project (http://pgdbf.sourceforge.net/). P.S. Spec file formatted by tabs with 5 space width ( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PavelAlexeev/tabsize ). Please, do not start review if it is a problem for you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 #9 from Jiri Moskovcak 2011-01-24 07:54:51 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ledmon Short Description: Enclosure LED Utilities Owners: jmoskovc Branches: 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 669010] Review Request: libfap - C port of Ham::APRS::FAP APRS Parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669010 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 07:40:54 EST --- libfap-1.0-3.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libfap-1.0-3.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 598815] Review Request: gnome-battery-status-applet - Better replacement for the power icon in notification area.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598815 Noura El hawary changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ys...@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 669010] Review Request: libfap - C port of Ham::APRS::FAP APRS Parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=669010 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2011-01-24 07:33:53 EST --- libfap-1.0-3.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libfap-1.0-3.fc14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
