[Bug 683463] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463 --- Comment #23 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfr...@tanso.net 2011-06-27 02:37:04 EDT --- http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-4/trafficserver-3.0.0-4.el6.src.rpm http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-4/trafficserver.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 683463] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463 Mark Chappell trem...@tremble.org.uk changed: What|Removed |Added CC||trem...@tremble.org.uk --- Comment #24 from Mark Chappell trem...@tremble.org.uk 2011-06-27 03:12:54 EDT --- Issues: * Rpmlint rpmlint SPECS/trafficserver.spec SPECS/trafficserver.spec:93: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 93, tab: line 3) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. * Odd macro - not needed. %define version 3.0.0 * Please consider renaming the patches, so they at least all contain trafficserver- -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716808] New: Review Request: grapefruit - Python module for color information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: grapefruit - Python module for color information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716808 Summary: Review Request: grapefruit - Python module for color information Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://kumarpraveen.fedorapeople.org/grapefruit/grapefruit.spec SRPM URL: http://kumarpraveen.fedorapeople.org/grapefruit/grapefruit-0.1a3-1.20110627svn31.fc15.src.rpm Description: GrapeFruit is a pure Python module that let you easily manipulate and convert color information. Its Primary goal is to be natural and flexible. Koji Build : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3162998 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630299] Review Request: ghc-wai - Web Application Interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630299 --- Comment #10 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 03:29:41 EDT --- Sorry meant: ghc_arches is now available in all current releases so you *can* use 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 716808] Review Request: grapefruit - Python module for color information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716808 Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683463] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463 --- Comment #25 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfr...@tanso.net 2011-06-27 03:33:01 EDT --- Thanks, fixed these in v3.0.0-5: http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver.spec http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-3.0.0-5.el6.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 683463] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463 --- Comment #26 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfr...@tanso.net 2011-06-27 03:52:44 EDT --- BTW: I also have builds for RHEL6/x86_64 at: http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-3.0.0-5.el6.x86_64.rpm http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-debuginfo-3.0.0-5.el6.x86_64.rpm http://blag.tanso.net/code/ats/v3.0.0-5/trafficserver-devel-3.0.0-5.el6.x86_64.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 716835] New: Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale
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-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716835 Summary: Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale 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 Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-PerlIO-locale/perl-PerlIO-locale.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-PerlIO-locale/perl-PerlIO-locale-0.07-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: This is mostly a per-file-handle version of the open pragma, when used under the form: use open ':locale'; The encoding for the opened file will be set to the encoding corresponding to the locale currently in effect, if perl can guess 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 716835] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716835 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716844] New: Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716844 Summary: Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: jitesh.1...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: https://sites.google.com/a/jiteshs.com/www/public/django-recaptcha.spec SRPM URL: https://sites.google.com/a/jiteshs.com/www/public/django-recaptcha-0.1-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: A Django application providing a simple widget, field and middleware for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form. rpmlint is mostly clean. The only problem is that there hasn't been a official release yet, so there is no tarball in their release. Not sure what the Source tag in the SPEC file should be. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716844] Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716844 --- Comment #1 from Jitesh Shah jitesh.1...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 05:16:23 EDT --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3163190 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 715610] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Exception - Throw HTTP-Errors as (Exception::Class-) Exceptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715610 Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Emmanuel Seyman emmanuel.sey...@club-internet.fr 2011-06-27 05:14:43 EDT --- Thanks, Iain. I owe you one. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-HTTP-Exception Short Description: Throw HTTP-Errors as (Exception::Class-) Exceptions Owners: eseyman Branches: f15 InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 673776] Review Request: leksah - An IDE for Haskell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673776 --- Comment #7 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 05:51:21 EDT --- Thanks - I had a quick look over the package and basically looks ok. I am curious why it BRs ImageMagick? BTW have you posted the leksah.cabal patch upstream? It would be good to get it integrated I guess. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716844] Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716844 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||methe...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 05:59:37 EDT --- You should add a comment explaining the steps to generate the tarball. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control Example: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716808 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 626004] Review Request: osm2pgsql - Imports map data from OpenStreetMap to a PostgreSQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626004 Roy Rankin rran...@ihug.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rran...@ihug.com.au AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rran...@ihug.com.au Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #12 from Roy Rankin rran...@ihug.com.au 2011-06-27 07:15:23 EDT --- Fabian, Under F15 mock still fails to build for me. Try 1 backout the latest patch 2 add BuildRequires: automake Also if you add BuildRequires: protobuf-c-devel the program will be able to process .pbf files. Finally there is an upstream OSM Ticket #3457 default.style location which should be fixed with the attached modified osm2pgsql-makefile.patch file. These changes should allow me to start the review process. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 626004] Review Request: osm2pgsql - Imports map data from OpenStreetMap to a PostgreSQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626004 --- Comment #11 from Roy Rankin rran...@ihug.com.au 2011-06-27 07:14:24 EDT --- Created attachment 510073 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=510073 modified patch so osm2pgsql finds default.style -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 673776] Review Request: leksah - An IDE for Haskell
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673776 --- Comment #8 from Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 07:20:05 EDT --- Ok. Thanks There is a convert program supplied as part of ImageMagick. This is used by the spec to convert leksah.png image to be suitable for an icon in start menu. Yes, I will send the patch. Just fyi, both leksah and yi fail to build ghc-7.0 because of this issue http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/hackage/ticket/656 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716895] New: Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords
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-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716895 Summary: Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords 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 Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Authen-OATH/perl-Authen-OATH.spec SRPM URL: http://ppisar.fedorapeople.org/perl-Authen-OATH/perl-Authen-OATH-1.0.0-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Implementation of the HOTP and TOTP One Time Password algorithms as defined by OATH (http://www.openauthentication.org). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716895] Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716895 Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||psab...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|psab...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716844] Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716844 pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716808] Review Request: grapefruit - Python module for color information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716808 pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716835] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716835
Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 07:53:41 EDT ---
Package: perl-PerlIO-locale
Version: 0.07
Release: 1.fc15
Sources: PerlIO-locale-0.07.tar.gz
Patches:
--
Package successfully built locally.
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-15-x86_64.
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-15-i386.
Package successfully built in koji, dist-rawhide.
MUST items:
[ OK ] Package does NOT include pre-built binaries or libraries
[ OK ] Spec file is legible and written in American english
[ OK ] Package successfully builds on at least one supported primary
architecture
[ -- ] All ExcludeArch tags valid, referencing proper bug reports
[ OK ] Package obeys FHS (with _libexecdir and /srv exceptions)
[ OK ] No errors reported by rpmlint
[ OK ] Changelog present and properly formatted
[ OK ] Package does NOT include Packager, Vendor, Copyright or PreReq tags
[ OK ] Source tags are working URLs and sources match upstream or justified
otherwise
[ OK ] Requires correct or justified otherwise
[ OK ] BuildRequires correct or justified otherwise
[ OK ] All file names are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[ OK ] All plain text failes are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[ -- ] Large documentation files are located in doc subpackage
[ OK ] All documentation prefixed with %doc
[ OK ] Documentation is NOT executable
[ OK ] No files in %doc are needed at run-time
[ OK ] Compiler flags honor Fedora defaults or are justified
[ OK ] Package generates useful debuginfo packages
[ -- ] Header files are placed in devel subpackage
[ -- ] Unversioned shared libraries are placed in devel subpackage
[ -- ] Pkgconfig files are placed in devel subpackage
[ -- ] Full-versioned Requires of the base package in subpackages
[ -- ] Package calls ldconfig in post and postun sections for all
subpackages, if applicable
[ -- ] Static libraries are provided by static subpackage
[ OK ] Package contains no static executables unless approved by FESCo
[ OK ] Package does NOT bundle any system libraries
[ OK ] RPath not used for anything besides internal libraries
[ -- ] All config files are marked noreplace or justified otherwise
[ OK ] No config files are located under /usr
[ -- ] Package contains a SystemV-compatible initscript
[ -- ] A GUI application installs a proper desktop file
[ -- ] All desktop files are installed by desktop-file-install or justified
otherwise
[ OK ] Package consistently uses macros
[ -- ] makeinstall macro is used only if make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
does NOT work
[ -- ] Macros in Summary and description are expandable at build-time
[ -- ] globals used in place of defines
[ -- ] Locales handled correctly -- package requires gettext and uses
find_lang, if applicable
[ -- ] Scriptlets are sane
[ OK ] Package is not relocatable unless justified
[ OK ] Package contains only acceptable code or content
[ OK ] Package owns all the files and directories it creates, installs and/or
uses unless those are already owned by another package
[ OK ] files sections do NOT contain duplicate files except for licenses
[ OK ] Package does NOT cause any conflicts
[ OK ] Package does NOT contain kernel modules
[ OK ] Package does NOT bundle fonts or other general purpose data
[ OK ] Final Requires and Provides are sane
SHOULD items:
[ OK ] The Summary does NOT end with a period
[ OK ] Package does NOT include BuildRoot tag, clean section or buildroot
removal in install section
[ OK ] Package should preserve files timestamps
[ OK ] Package does NOT explicitly BuildRequire bash, bzip2, coreutils, cpio,
diffutils, fedora-release, findutils, gawk, gcc, gcc-c++, grep, gzip, info,
make, patch, redhat-rpm-config, rpm-build, sed, shadow-utils, tar, unzip,
util-linux-ng, which or xz
[ OK ] Description does NOT consist of lines longer than 80 characters
[ OK ] Package uses parallel make
[ -- ] In case of a web application, package installs date into /usr/share
instead of /var/www
[ -- ] All patches have a comment or an upstream bug link
[ -- ] Package installs manpages for all executables
[ OK ] Package contains check section and all tests pass
[ ?? ] Package works as expected
NOTES:
--
Everything seems fine, approving.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 716835] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716835 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 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 716835] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716835 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 08:13:47 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-PerlIO-locale Short Description: PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716895] Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716895
Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Petr Sabata psab...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 08:21:46 EDT ---
Package: perl-Authen-OATH
Version: 1.0.0
Release: 1.fc15
Sources: Authen-OATH-v1.0.0.tar.gz
Patches:
--
Package successfully built locally.
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-15-x86_64.
Package successfully built in mock, fedora-15-i386.
Package successfully built in koji, dist-rawhide.
MUST items:
[ OK ] Package does NOT include pre-built binaries or libraries
[ OK ] Spec file is legible and written in American english
[ OK ] Package successfully builds on at least one supported primary
architecture
[ -- ] All ExcludeArch tags valid, referencing proper bug reports
[ OK ] Package obeys FHS (with _libexecdir and /srv exceptions)
[ OK ] No errors reported by rpmlint
[ OK ] Changelog present and properly formatted
[ OK ] Package does NOT include Packager, Vendor, Copyright or PreReq tags
[ OK ] Source tags are working URLs and sources match upstream or justified
otherwise
[ OK ] Requires correct or justified otherwise
[ NOTE ] BuildRequires correct or justified otherwise
[ OK ] All file names are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[ OK ] All plain text failes are in proper UTF-8 encoding
[ -- ] Large documentation files are located in doc subpackage
[ OK ] All documentation prefixed with %doc
[ OK ] Documentation is NOT executable
[ OK ] No files in %doc are needed at run-time
[ -- ] Compiler flags honor Fedora defaults or are justified
[ -- ] Package generates useful debuginfo packages
[ -- ] Header files are placed in devel subpackage
[ -- ] Unversioned shared libraries are placed in devel subpackage
[ -- ] Pkgconfig files are placed in devel subpackage
[ -- ] Full-versioned Requires of the base package in subpackages
[ -- ] Package calls ldconfig in post and postun sections for all
subpackages, if applicable
[ -- ] Static libraries are provided by static subpackage
[ OK ] Package contains no static executables unless approved by FESCo
[ OK ] Package does NOT bundle any system libraries
[ -- ] RPath not used for anything besides internal libraries
[ -- ] All config files are marked noreplace or justified otherwise
[ OK ] No config files are located under /usr
[ -- ] Package contains a SystemV-compatible initscript
[ -- ] A GUI application installs a proper desktop file
[ -- ] All desktop files are installed by desktop-file-install or justified
otherwise
[ OK ] Package consistently uses macros
[ -- ] makeinstall macro is used only if make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
does NOT work
[ -- ] Macros in Summary and description are expandable at build-time
[ -- ] globals used in place of defines
[ -- ] Locales handled correctly -- package requires gettext and uses
find_lang, if applicable
[ -- ] Scriptlets are sane
[ OK ] Package is not relocatable unless justified
[ OK ] Package contains only acceptable code or content
[ OK ] Package owns all the files and directories it creates, installs and/or
uses unless those are already owned by another package
[ OK ] files sections do NOT contain duplicate files except for licenses
[ OK ] Package does NOT cause any conflicts
[ OK ] Package does NOT contain kernel modules
[ OK ] Package does NOT bundle fonts or other general purpose data
[ OK ] Final Requires and Provides are sane
SHOULD items:
[ OK ] The Summary does NOT end with a period
[ OK ] Package does NOT include BuildRoot tag, clean section or buildroot
removal in install section
[ OK ] Package should preserve files timestamps
[ OK ] Package does NOT explicitly BuildRequire bash, bzip2, coreutils, cpio,
diffutils, fedora-release, findutils, gawk, gcc, gcc-c++, grep, gzip, info,
make, patch, redhat-rpm-config, rpm-build, sed, shadow-utils, tar, unzip,
util-linux-ng, which or xz
[ OK ] Description does NOT consist of lines longer than 80 characters
[ -- ] Package uses parallel make
[ -- ] In case of a web application, package installs date into /usr/share
instead of /var/www
[ -- ] All patches have a comment or an upstream bug link
[ -- ] Package installs manpages for all executables
[ OK ] Package contains check section and all tests pass
[ ?? ] Package works as expected
NOTES:
--
META.yml states the minimum Module::Build version should be 0.36.
BuildRequire: perl(Module::Build) = 0.3600 would be nice but it's not a
showstopper for currently supported versions of Fedora.
Approving.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You
[Bug 697492] Review Request: django-keyedcache - Utilities for simplified development of cache aware objects
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697492 Lakshmi Narasimhan lakshminaras2...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lakshminaras2...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|lakshminaras2...@gmail.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716895] Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716895 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 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 716895] Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716895 --- Comment #2 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 08:27:13 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Authen-OATH Short Description: OATH One Time Passwords Owners: ppisar mmaslano psabata Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716895] Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716895 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 08:44:50 EDT --- 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 716835] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716835 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 08:44:27 EDT --- 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 665877] Review Request: freeDiameter - a Diameter protocol open 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=665877 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 08:43:17 EDT --- 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 715610] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Exception - Throw HTTP-Errors as (Exception::Class-) Exceptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715610 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 08:43:48 EDT --- 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 716895] Review Request: perl-Authen-OATH - OATH One Time Passwords
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716895 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Authen-OATH-1.0.0-1.fc ||16 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-06-27 09:05:00 --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 09:05:00 EDT --- Thank you for the review and the repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 715314] Review Request: metis - A set of serial programs for partitioning graphs, partitioning finite element meshes, and producing fill reducing orderings for sparse matrices
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715314 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) --- Comment #1 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2011-06-27 09:56:42 EDT --- LICENSE reads: The METIS package is copyrighted by the Regents of the University of Minnesota. It can be freely used for educational and research purposes by non-profit institutions and US government agencies only. Other organizations are allowed to use METIS only for evaluation purposes, and any further uses will require prior approval. The software may not be sold or redistributed without prior approval. One may make copies of the software for their use provided that the copies, are not sold or distributed, are used under the same terms and conditions. This is clearly nonfree and unappropriate for Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683150] Review Request: yad - Display graphical dialogs from shell scripts or command line
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683150 --- Comment #11 from Elder Marco elderma...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 09:59:08 EDT --- - Get in touch with touch with upstream and tell him that the FSF address is outdated. Even better: Provide a patch. Fixed in revision 333. http://code.google.com/p/yad/source/detail?r=333 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608852] Review Request: epris - a dbus service to listen to music
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608852 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||l...@jcomserv.net Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #17 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 09:58:20 EDT --- I'll take this: Initially, Source URL is invalid: epris.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://epris.googlecode.com/files/epris-0.2.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. Additionally, some non-issue spelling errors, and: epris.x86_64: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. epris.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary epr Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. Working on a mock build, will post results when complete. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 712203] Review Request: eclipse-mercurial - Mercurial plugin for Eclipse
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712203 minoo ziaei mzi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-06-27 10:19:36 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608852] Review Request: epris - a dbus service to listen to music
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608852 --- Comment #18 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 10:20:42 EDT --- Good: - rpmlint checks return: Above^^^ Mock build good. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( ) OK, text in not in %doc, not included but matches website. - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86_64) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file Fix docs and ideally manpage, but I'm not going to worry too much if other docs are present. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 649826] Review Request: instantbird - Instant messaging client based on XULrunner and libpurple
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=649826 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@jcomserv.net --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 10:24:18 EDT --- Must be B: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716835] Review Request: perl-PerlIO-locale - PerlIO layer to use the encoding of the current locale
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716835 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-PerlIO-locale-0.07-1.f ||c16 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-06-27 10:25:54 --- Comment #4 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 10:25:54 EDT --- Thank you for the review and the repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 711047] Review Request: naev - 2d action, RPG space game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711047 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 10:29:58 EDT --- *** Bug 713925 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713925] Review Request: naev - 2D space trading and combat game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=713925 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||DUPLICATE Last Closed||2011-06-27 10:29:58 --- Comment #3 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 10:29:58 EDT --- Darn! I thought I searched for existing RR for this one, many apologies. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 711047 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641957] Review Request: rubygem-database_cleaner - Strategies for cleaning databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641957
Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||clala...@redhat.com
Flag||needinfo?(vondruch@redhat.c
||om)
--- Comment #9 from Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 10:40:43
EDT ---
Since this has been stale for so long, I'll take over the review here.
[clalance@localhost ~]$ rpmlint rubygem-database_cleaner.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[clalance@localhost ~]$ rpmlint rubygem-database_cleaner-0.6.6-1.fc15.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Based on the guidelines at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby
MUST require ruby abi: OK
MUST be called rubygem-UPSTREAM: OK
MUST have full URL to released gem archive: OK
MUST Require rubygems: OK
MUST BuildRequire rubygems: OK
MUST Provide rubygem(%{gemname}): OK
SHOULD have empty %prep: FAIL
SHOULD have empty %build: OK
MUST be installed into %{gemdir}: OK
SHOULD be installed with gem install --local: FAIL
MUST own gems, cache, and specifications: OK
MUST not install arch-specific content into %{gemdir}: N/A
MUST be marked as BuildArch noarch for pure ruby: OK
This looks pretty good, except for the fact that the installation is done
during the %prep section instead of during the %install section. However, I
have seen reasons that this was necessary in the past, so if there is a good
reason we can waive it. Vit, what is the reason that the gem install command
is done in %prep as opposed to %install?
Thanks,
Chris Lalancette
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 641957] Review Request: rubygem-database_cleaner - Strategies for cleaning databases
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=641957 Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|r...@n.rix.si |clala...@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 711047] Review Request: naev - 2d action, RPG space game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711047
--- Comment #3 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-06-27
10:43:34 EDT ---
Quick comments:
* You do not need the BuildRoot setting, it is obsolete in all current versions
of Fedora. It is only needed for EPEL branches older than 6.
* You do not need the rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install. It is
the default in all current versions of Fedora. It is only needed for EPEL
branches older than 6.
* You do not need the default %clean section. A %clean that simply deletes the
%{buildroot} is the default in all current versions of Fedora. It is only
needed for EPEL branches older than 6.
* configure seems to be searching for libGL and libGLU, perhaps
mesa-libGL-devel, mesa-libGLU-devel should be added as BuildRequires?
* make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install seems to work fine, perhaps you should use
it (and just run desktop-file-validate
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop)
* You do not need to explicitly mark manpages as %doc, anything in the mandir
is automatically marked as %doc.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608852] Review Request: epris - a dbus service to listen to music
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608852 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|l...@jcomserv.net -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 627936] Review Request: bowtie - An ultrafast, memory-efficient short read aligner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627936 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||l...@jcomserv.net AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|l...@jcomserv.net Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 10:53:17 EDT --- Other than trivial spelling errors, rpmlint gives: bowtie.x86_64: E: script-without-shebang /usr/share/bowtie/scripts/gen_dnamasks2colormask.pl This text file has executable bits set or is located in a path dedicated for executables, but lacks a shebang and cannot thus be executed. If the file is meant to be an executable script, add the shebang, otherwise remove the executable bits or move the file elsewhere. Patch for this, and drop the patch when upstream fixes it. bowtie.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bowtie Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. bowtie.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bowtie-inspect Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. bowtie.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary bowtie-build Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. No man pages exist, unfortunately, but you might suggest that upstream create some. Otherwise: Good: - rpmlint checks return: - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file To fix: Patch for shebang. Include the doc/ dir in %doc. Mock build in progress for BR check. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 627936] Review Request: bowtie - An ultrafast, memory-efficient short read aligner
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=627936 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 11:11:37 EDT --- Mock build was good, so it's just the two issues above. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 711047] Review Request: naev - 2d action, RPG space game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711047
--- Comment #4 from Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:31:27 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #3)
Quick comments:
* You do not need the BuildRoot setting, it is obsolete in all current
versions
of Fedora. It is only needed for EPEL branches older than 6.
Fixed
* You do not need the rm -rf %{buildroot} at the beginning of %install. It is
the default in all current versions of Fedora. It is only needed for EPEL
branches older than 6.
Fixed
* You do not need the default %clean section. A %clean that simply deletes the
%{buildroot} is the default in all current versions of Fedora. It is only
needed for EPEL branches older than 6.
Fixed
* configure seems to be searching for libGL and libGLU, perhaps
mesa-libGL-devel, mesa-libGLU-devel should be added as BuildRequires?
Fixed
* make DESTDIR=%{buildroot} install seems to work fine, perhaps you should use
it (and just run desktop-file-validate
%{buildroot}%{_datadir}/applications/%{name}.desktop)
Fixed, though I now manually choose the highest quality png in extras/logos as
the icon. The default png is 32x32, which looks pretty bad in gnome-shell.
* You do not need to explicitly mark manpages as %doc, anything in the mandir
is automatically marked as %doc.
I tried this, but got:
Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
/home/jonathan/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/naev-0.5.0-2.fc15.i386
error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
/usr/share/man/man6/naev.6.gz
RPM build errors:
Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
/usr/share/man/man6/naev.6.gz
Maybe I'm just making a stupid mistake?
Updated packages at:
Spec URL:
http://www.lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/naev.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/naev-0.5.0-2.fc15.src.rpm
32-bit F15 RPM:
http://www.lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/naev-0.5.0-2.fc15.i686.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 683463] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463 --- Comment #28 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:35:10 EDT --- Can remove the following as well for Fedora spec unless you want to keep the same spec for EPEL as well %clean rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#.25clean -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683463] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463
Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||methe...@gmail.com
--- Comment #27 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:33:07
EDT ---
No need to define buildroot anymore unless you are branching for EPEL 5 as well
BuildRoot: %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}-root
Patches should have a comment indicating upstream status
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PatchUpstreamStatus
I would prefer you use systemd native service file for Rawhide.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 252108] Review Request: python-html5lib - A python based HTML5 parser/tokenizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=252108 --- Comment #32 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:38:44 EDT --- Any update? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 711048] Review Request: naev-data - Data files for NAEV game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=711048 --- Comment #2 from Jonathan Dieter jdie...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:40:54 EDT --- Did some cleanup on the spec file as per comments in bug #711047. Spec URL: http://www.lesloueizeh.com/jdieter/naev-data.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 705426] Review Request: blender25 - 3D modeling, animation, rendering and post-production
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705426 --- Comment #9 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 11:47:32 EDT --- If blender25 could be parallel installable with the current release package. Wouldn't that keep it from interfering? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 622151] Review Request: GLee - GL Easy Extension 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=622151 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||l...@jcomserv.net AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|l...@jcomserv.net Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 12:06:41 EDT --- Good: - rpmlint checks return: - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file - devel package ok - no .la files - post/postun ldconfig ok - devel requires base package n-v-r This looks good. Doing mock build for BRs. If that's good I'll approve. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608512] Review Request: python-anyvc - Python library to access different version control 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=608512 PRABIN KUMAR DATTA linux.n@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||linux.n@gmail.com Bug 608512 depends on bug 605423, which changed state. Bug 605423 Summary: Review Request: python-dulwich - A python implementation of the Git file formats and protocols https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=605423 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA --- Comment #2 from PRABIN KUMAR DATTA linux.n@gmail.com 2011-06-27 12:08:35 EDT --- Project url is not pypi.python.org but [1] will be the url for this package. - [1]. http://www.bitbucket.org/RonnyPfannschmidt/anyvc/ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710386] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-system-monitor-applet - A Gnome shell system monitor extension
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710386 --- Comment #12 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-06-27 12:13:59 EDT --- Preferences is not working because of a missing file in 1.92-1. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 644711] Review Request: diaser - disk based backup volume accumulator, replication and management 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=644711 Damian L Brasher fed...@interlinux.org.uk changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|needinfo? | --- Comment #8 from Damian L Brasher fed...@interlinux.org.uk 2011-06-27 12:15:51 EDT --- Change in SRPM and SPEC location: SPEC URL: http://diaser.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=diaser/diaser;a=blob_plain;f=diaser.spec;hb=HEAD SRPM URL: http://sourceforge.net/projects/diaser/files/diaser/1.1.0-beta3-dev/diaser-1.1.0-1.fc15.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 687875] Review Request: aarddict - Multi-platform dictionary and offline Wikipedia reader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=687875 --- Comment #14 from PRABIN KUMAR DATTA linux.n@gmail.com 2011-06-27 12:15:30 EDT --- Hi! David Nalley, This package is under review from a long time. Also, the dependency package pyicu is also pushed into fedora stable repo. Can u kindly review this package?? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 675050] Review Request: cloudfs - Cloud Filesystem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675050 Kaleb KEITHLEY kkeit...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kkeit...@redhat.com --- Comment #9 from Kaleb KEITHLEY kkeit...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 12:16:29 EDT --- IMO it's sort of a spurious argument to claim that some arbitrary package built -I/usr/include/glusterfs can't get /usr/include/uuid.h without resorting to unusual measures. In all likelihood the only package that will use it is CloudFS, and CloudFS doesn't need /usr/include/uuid.h at all, and so doesn't need to resort to any measures whatsoever. Is there a concrete example of another package besides CloudFS that would use glusterfs-devel? NB. The glusterfs uuid.h is, apart from an extra #include config.h, identical to Ted T'so's libuuid-devel uuid.h installed in /usr/include/uuid/uuid.h. (These are _not_ the same as uuid-devel /usr/include/uuid.h.) Note too that it doesn't work to just change the '#include uuid.h' in iatt.h to glusterfs/uuid.h. The glusterfs headers come from different subdirs in the glusterfs source changing their iatt.h or their source tree upstream is, as jdarcy said, highly unlikely. The only way this would work would be to patch all the gluster headers while building glusterfs-devel to change all the #include foo.h to #include glusterfs/foo.h. Finally note that the extraordinary lengths suggested above (-I/usr/include or #include_nextuuid.h) don't work anyway. At least not with F14's gcc-4.5.1 or F15's gcc-4.6.0, which appear to be overly clever in determining that they have already included uuid.h from somewhere and won't include it again. (And no, it's not a function of #ifndef _UUID_H_/#define _UUID_H_ type protection.) It might make more sense to remove the uuid.h from the glusterfs-devel package and fix cloudfs to use the libuuid-devel version. However doing this means we add a dependency to libuuid-devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 712567] Review Request: gnome-shell-theme-ambiance - the ambiance gnome-shell theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712567 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)| --- Comment #7 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 12:21:00 EDT --- Lifting FE-Legal, thanks for your effort Tim. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 622151] Review Request: GLee - GL Easy Extension 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=622151 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 12:27:39 EDT --- Mock build good. 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 594481] Review Request: orion-ssh2 - SSH-2 protocol implementation in pure Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=594481 Bug Zapper tri...@lists.fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Flag|needinfo?(lkund...@v3.sk) | Last Closed||2011-06-27 12:31:24 --- Comment #18 from Bug Zapper tri...@lists.fedoraproject.org 2011-06-27 12:31:24 EDT --- Fedora 13 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2011-06-25. Fedora 13 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be 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 252108] Review Request: python-html5lib - A python based HTML5 parser/tokenizer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=252108 --- Comment #33 from Oded Arbel o...@geek.co.il 2011-06-27 12:38:40 EDT --- (In reply to comment #32) Any update? Thanks for taking the time to review the package. I apologize that I have not made any response yet - I'm busy doing other urgent things, but I will get back to this tomorrow. Thanks again. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 665877] Review Request: freeDiameter - a Diameter protocol open 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=665877 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-06-27 12:37:54 EDT --- freeDiameter-1.1.0-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/freeDiameter-1.1.0-1.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 699336] Review Request: askbot - Question and Answer forum
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=699336 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||716808, 716844 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716844] Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716844 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||699336 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716808] Review Request: grapefruit - Python module for color information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716808 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||699336 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 599597] Review Request: amule - The all-platform eMule p2p client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=599597 Bug Zapper tri...@lists.fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Flag|needinfo?(supercyper1@gmail | |.com) | Last Closed|2010-11-26 09:39:24 |2011-06-27 13:26:14 --- Comment #8 from Bug Zapper tri...@lists.fedoraproject.org 2011-06-27 13:26:14 EDT --- Fedora 13 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2011-06-25. Fedora 13 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be 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 530684] Review Request: nordugrid-arc - Advanced Resource Connector Grid Middleware
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=530684
--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 13:35:29 EDT ---
Ok, it builds now. :)
rpmlint:
nordugrid-arc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware - middle
ware, middle-ware, middleweight
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
nordugrid-arc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US organisation -
organization, organist, sanitation
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
nordugrid-arc.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US analyse - analyses,
analyst, analyze
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
Fix 2 and 3, skip 1.
nordugrid-arc-aris.noarch: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
nordugrid-arc-aris.noarch: E: subsys-not-used /etc/rc.d/init.d/grid-infosys
While your daemon is running, you have to put a lock file in
/var/lock/subsys/. To see an example, look at this directory on your machine
and examine the corresponding init scripts.
nordugrid-arc-aris.noarch: W: incoherent-init-script-name grid-infosys
('nordugrid-arc-aris', 'nordugrid-arc-arisd')
The init script name should be the same as the package name in lower case, or
one with 'd' appended if it invokes a process by that name.
nordugrid-arc-ca-utils.noarch: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
nordugrid-arc-gridmap-utils.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nordugridmap
Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page.
nordugrid-arc-ldap-monitor.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/share/arc/ldap-monitor/cache/placeholder
nordugrid-arc-ws-monitor.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/share/arc/ws-monitor/cache/placeholder
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-httpsd
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-logger-server
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-nox-charon
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-nox-compiler
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-nox-delegation
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-nox-paul
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-nox-saml2sp
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided nordugrid-arc-nox-slcs
If a package is obsoleted by a compatible replacement, the obsoleted package
should also be provided in order to not cause unnecessary dependency breakage.
If the obsoleting package is not a compatible replacement for the old one,
leave out the Provides.
nordugrid-arc.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libarccrypto.so.1.0.0
_exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
This library package calls exit() or _exit(), probably in a non-fork()
context. Doing so from a library is strongly discouraged - when a library
function calls exit(), it prevents the calling program from handling the
error, reporting it to the user, closing files properly, and cleaning up
[Bug 716613] Review Request: gpaste - Clipboard management 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=716613 --- Comment #3 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 13:51:38 EDT --- Oups sorry, bad copy/past Under review but not approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716613] Review Request: gpaste - Clipboard management 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=716613
Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||llaum...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2011-06-27
13:50:49 EDT ---
Here is the review.
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package.
-OK, only false-positive spelling issues
MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
-OK
MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption.
-OK
MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
-OK
MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the
Licensing Guidelines.
-OK
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
-OK, all files under GPL v3 or more
MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for
the package must be included in %doc.
-N/A
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
-OK
MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
-OK
MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
-OK, md5sum = 21c385a7c6ae635b27e7b6fdb9c41f0c
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
-OK
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
-N/A
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional.
-OK
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
-N/A
MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files
(not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun.
-N/A
MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.
-OK
MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this
fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker.
-N/A
MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not create
a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory.
OK
MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
-OK
MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set with
executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include a
%defattr(...) line.
-OK
MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
-OK
MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
-OK
MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
-N/A
MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of
the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
-OK
MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
-N/A
MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
-N/A
MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
-N/A
MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}.
-N/A
MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be removed
in the spec if they are built.
-N/A
MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file,
and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section.
-N/A
MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
-OK
MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
-OK
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
[Bug 716402] Review Request: ckermit - The quintessential all-purpose communications program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716402 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||l...@jcomserv.net AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|l...@jcomserv.net Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 13:55:44 EDT --- Working on formal 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 716402] Review Request: ckermit - The quintessential all-purpose communications program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716402 --- Comment #2 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 14:04:31 EDT --- ckermit.src: W: file-size-mismatch x.tar.gz = 2413399, http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ftp/test/tar/x.tar.gz = 2413309 The size of the file in the package does not match the size indicated by peeking at its URL. Verify that the file in the package has the intended contents. Good: - rpmlint checks return: ckermit.src: W: file-size-mismatch x.tar.gz = 2413399, http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ftp/test/tar/x.tar.gz = 2413309 The size of the file in the package does not match the size indicated by peeking at its URL. Verify that the file in the package has the intended contents. Explained by comments. - package meets naming guidelines - package meets packaging guidelines - license ( ) OK, text in %doc, matches source - spec file legible, in am. english - source matches upstream: No, but see above. - package compiles on devel (x86) - no missing BR - no unnecessary BR - no locales - not relocatable - owns all directories that it creates - no duplicate files - permissions ok - %clean ok - macro use consistent - code, not content - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no need for .desktop file Running mock build to rest BRs, but otherwise it looks great. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693664] Review Request: supybot-gribble - Cross-platform support bot based on supybot
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693664 --- Comment #14 from David Riches davi...@ultracar.co.uk 2011-06-27 14:07:15 EDT --- Here we go, I think its ready to roll.. http://dcr226.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/supybot-gribble.spec http://dcr226.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/supybot-gribble-0.83.4.1-3.fc15.src.rpm Koji Stuff: dist-f14 - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164164 dist-f15 - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164171 dist-rawhide - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164175 el6 - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164179 rpmlint: [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint supybot-gribble.spec supybot-gribble.spec:19: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes supybot supybot-gribble.spec:20: W: unversioned-explicit-provides /usr/bin/supybot supybot-gribble.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: supybot-gribble-20110404.tar 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. I'm not sure I can add a specific version to the obsoletes, it obsoletes all supybots, also with the provides. [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/supybot-gribble-0.83.4.1-3.fc15.src.rpm supybot-gribble.src:19: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes supybot supybot-gribble.src:20: W: unversioned-explicit-provides /usr/bin/supybot supybot-gribble.src: W: invalid-url Source0: supybot-gribble-20110404.tar 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. As above [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint ../RPMS/noarch/supybot-gribble-0.83.4.1-3.fc15.noarch.rpm supybot-gribble.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided supybot supybot-gribble.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/supybot/plugins/Dict/local/dictclient.py 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. What I propose to do here is, notify the upstream (they work quickly) get it fixed and re-pull a new tarball...I'm hoping this isn't a blocker -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716613] Review Request: gpaste - Clipboard management 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=716613
Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #4 from Guillaume Kulakowski llaum...@gmail.com 2011-06-27
14:09:33 EDT ---
Question, why don't use this URL for generate archive :
https://github.com/downloads/Keruspe/%{alt_name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 ?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713677] Review Request: klt - An implementation of the Kanade-Lucas-Tomasi feature tracker.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=713677 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #7 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 14:10:18 EDT --- Hello, I've gone ahead and generated shared objects also. Fresh srpm/spec: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/klt/klt-1.3.4-1.fc15.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/klt/klt.spec === [ankur@ankur SPECS]$ rpmlint klt.spec ../SRPMS/klt-1.3.4-1.fc15.src.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/klt-* klt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Multi - Mulch, Mufti klt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US affine - caffeine, fine klt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Multi - Mulch, Mufti klt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US affine - caffeine, fine klt.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libklt.so.1.3.4 exit@GLIBC_2.2.5 klt-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation klt-static.x86_64: W: no-documentation 6 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Thanks, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604033] Review Request: openemr - Practice Management, Electronic Medical Record
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604033 Bug Zapper tri...@lists.fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-06-27 14:15:56 --- Comment #7 from Bug Zapper tri...@lists.fedoraproject.org 2011-06-27 14:15:56 EDT --- Fedora 13 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2011-06-25. Fedora 13 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be 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 716402] Review Request: ckermit - The quintessential all-purpose communications program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716402 Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 14:25:49 EDT --- BRs are good. APPROVED. Welcome back! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717019] New: Review Request: tncfhh - An open source implementation of the Trusted Network Connect (TNC) framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: tncfhh - An open source implementation of the Trusted Network Connect (TNC) framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717019 Summary: Review Request: tncfhh - An open source implementation of the Trusted Network Connect (TNC) framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: avaga...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-package-rev...@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/avagarwa/files/tncfhh/tncfhh.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/avagarwa/files/tncfhh/tncfhh-0.8.2-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: The TNC@FHH project is an open source implementation of the Trusted Network Connect (TNC) framework, which is specified by the Trusted Computing Group (TCG). TNC@FHH allows you to provision access to a network based upon factors like the user credentials and the requesting endpoint's integrity state. The following TNC components and their respective interfaces are implemented by TNC@FHH: IMCs (IF-IMC 1.2), IMVs (IF-IMV 1.2), TNCS (IF-TNCCS 1.1), NAA (IF-T EAP 1.1). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 714543] Review Request: maze5 - A program for generating mazes of miscellaneous styles and sizes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714543 --- Comment #6 from W. Michael Petullo m...@flyn.org 2011-06-27 14:29:08 EDT --- Spec URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/maze5.spec SRPM URL: http://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/maze5-0.8.1-3.fc15.src.rpm Changes: - License is GPLv3+ - Use name macro in Source0 definition - GIMP package requires main package - Don't remove RPM_BUILD_ROOT - plugin-ins, not plugins - Consolidate build requirements - Use -p with install to preserve timestamps I have not yet implemented the compiler flags; I am trying to figure out the best way to do this due to the project's use of scons. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 712921] Review Request: zabbix18 - Open-source monitoring solution for your IT infrastructure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712921
Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||a.bad...@gmail.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|a.bad...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Toshio Ernie Kuratomi a.bad...@gmail.com 2011-06-27
14:47:24 EDT ---
Notes: Many of the to-be-fixed items apply to both this package and the main
zabbix package. With the exception of implementing this as alternatives, these
seem to be relatively easy changes. You said something about looking into
using alternatives with the main zabbix package and I'd be willing to approve
this package with the alternatives changes to be implemented when the main
zabbix package implements them if:
1) there's a timetable for that.
2) doing that doesn't seem like it would be an incompatible change that would
keep it from going into EPEL.
Good:
* Package named properly
* spec file named properly
* License is approved, correctly listed in spec, and included in package
* Spec is readable
* Upstream source matches what's in the srpm
* Builds in koji (EL5 target)
* No shared libraries
* Only bundled code that I could find were javascript which are currently
allowed
* Package not relocatable
* Package owns all files and directories it creates
* builds in koji for EL-5
* Consistent use of macros
* Contains code, not content
* Nothing in doc is needed at runtime
* Not a GUI app
* All filenames valid UTF-8
* License text included
* scriptlets almost seem sane -- see below
Mustfix:
* Source0 needs to change from
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{name}/%{srcname}-%{version}.tar.gz
to: http://downloads.sourceforge.net/%{srcname}/%{srcname}-%{version}.tar.gz
* Some of the Requires and Provides are still for zabbix-* instead of %{name}-*
* locale files like this are not marked with %lang():
/usr/share/zabbix/include/locales/it_it.inc.php
It looks like zabbix works if some translations are left out.
(locales.php loads the proper locale file for a request and it seems to
detect when a locale file is not present and continue to operate. If that's
correct, they should be marked with the proper
language so that they can be excluded by system administrators that don't
want to install them.
* FPC says that currently it looks like the Conflicts between the various
backends should use alternatives instead of Conflicts. I don't see anything
to prevent this from working.
* I see that we're protecting the %{_sysconfdir}/zabbix/web directory. Should
%{_sysconfdir}/zabbix/web/zabbix.conf.php also have 0640 permissions?
Are these made unreadable because they contain database passwords?
* The scriptlet that's creating the users and groups should create user and
group separately for the reason documented on the official packaging
guideline page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups
* Each subpackage should Conflict with the equivalent zabbix-* package
ie: zabbix18-web should have Conflict: %{srcname}-web
The main zabbix18 Conflicts on zabbix does this implicitly but explicit is
better here to make things clear. Also, it leaves open the possibility of
creating subpackages that do not Conflict: see below
Questions:
* The various zabbix18-web packages seem to just be there to keep us from
having to download php-mysql or php-pgsql. If so, it seems that the
web-sqlite3 doesn't require anything extra. It feels like the sqlite3
backend can be folded into the main packages so that we always have the
sqlite backend available and just the others are loaded on demand.
* Conflicts: It would be great if the zabbix18-agent and zabbix-agent
packages didn't conflict as that would allow sites that want to upgrade to
run two separate server and have clients talk to both during a transition
period. This is in no way a blocker, just a nice to have feature.
rpmlint:
rpmlint has a long list of items:
* Fix spelling
zabbix18.i386: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US visualisation -
visualization, visualizer, visualize
zabbix18.i386: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US organisations -
organizations, organizational, organization
* Submit upstream:
zabbix18.i386: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/zabbix18-1.8.5/COPYING
zabbix18-debuginfo.i386: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/zabbix-1.8.5/src/libs/zbxmedia/eztexting.c
(and other source files)
* Fix by just chmod 0644 the tarball
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/UsersAndGroups
* MUSTFIX noted above:
zabbix18.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/zabbix18/zabbix-1.8.5.tar.gz HTTP Error 404:
Not Found
* May be okay -- see the above question about permissions on config files
[Bug 712624] Review Request: aeskulap - A full open source replacement for commercially available DICOM viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712624
Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hobbes1...@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-06-27 14:59:26 EDT
---
If you don't need a sponsor then I can review your package. Here's a quick and
dirty review of the spec file. I'll add my comments inline with OK stuff
snipped out:
# Note: devel package does not contain any headers. Do I need to add them
# .so files are shared libraries, I need to call /sbin/ldconfig, but where? In
a
# post section for the devel package?
# Schemas handling also needs to be looked at.
I'm not sure if you need a devel package. Is there any reason a program would
want to build against this one? If so, then it probably should contain the
headers, if not, then probably no.
I don't think you need to call ldconfig since you're putting the libraries in a
named directory and not in the default (i.e. /usr/lib{,64}).
I'm not qualified to review the schema portion so we'll need some help on that
part.
# applied all the patches from the debian package
# svn export svn://svn.debian.org/svn/debian-med/trunk/packages/aeskulap/trunk/
aeskulap-debian
Patch0: %{name}-circular-svg.patch
Patch2: %{name}-DcmElement.patch
Patch3: %{name}-desktop.patch
Patch4: %{name}-findAndCopyElement.patch
Patch5: %{name}-gcc.patch
Patch6: %{name}-i18n.patch
# This is used to update the configure.in before running autoreconf fo update
the autotoolization.
fo - to
# Not used in spec file. It's listed here so it's there with the sources
Patch7: %{name}-configure.patch
Patch8: %{name}-oflog.patch
Patch9: %{name}-patientNames.patch
# applied patch7, ran autreconf -if, and then took a diff to generate this
patch
# The -if flag is to update the libtool macros.
Patch10:%{name}-autotools.patch
I wonder if this is the best way to handle this. I've run into a problem like
this with a package I maintain on RPM Fusion. I ended up calling autoconf from
%build, i.e.:
%build
# Necessary due to patched configure.in
/bin/bash ./autogen.sh
My way is pretty ugly too. Not sure which way is better.
BuildRequires: dcmtk-devel
BuildRequires: gettext intltool libpng-devel libjpeg-turbo-devel
BuildRequires: libtiff-devel gtkmm24-devel libglademm24-devel
BuildRequires: gconfmm26-devel libtool
BuildRequires: openssl-devel
BuildRequires: gettext-devel
BuildRequires: tcp_wrappers-devel
BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils
BuildRequires: GConf2
Requires(pre): GConf2
Requires(post): GConf2
Requires(preun): GConf2
I couldn't find anything definitive on this so hopefully someone more
knowledgeable will chime in. Since you are already requiring gettext-devel,
I'm not sure you need gettext.
Also, since GConf2 is a BR: I don't think the BR(pre,post,preun)'s are needed
or even do anything.
rm -rvf dcmtk
This line should have a comment above it. I assume you're removing a bundled
library?
touch ./NEWS
If there's no NEWS file upstream I don't think adding an empty one is
necessary, in fact I believe rpmlint will complain.
# remove .la files. Is this sufficient?
find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name *.la -exec rm -fv '{}' \;
Yup, that will do 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 675050] Review Request: cloudfs - Cloud Filesystem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675050 --- Comment #10 from Kaleb KEITHLEY kkeit...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 15:13:24 EDT --- All these hypothetical other packages that want to use glusterfs headers _and_ uuid.h have to do is compile with -iquote/usr/include/glusterfs (but they better have a config.h somewhere in the scope of their includes.) ISO C (ISO/IEC 9899:1999, 6.10.2) states that #include foo.h searches ... implementation defined places for the header. #include foo.h searches first in the same directory as the C file which included it, then in implementation defined places, as with foo.h The gcc info pages describe the implementation. For: #include foo.h gcc looks in first in directories added with -I, then in /usr/local/include, $libdir/gcc/$target/$version/include, /usr/$target/include, and /usr/include. For: #include foo.h gcc looks first in the directory containing the current file (i.e. the file with the #include), then in directories specified with -iquote, then as for foo.h. For truth-and-beauty we should probably use -iquote for CloudFS. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 --- Comment #13 from Shaun McCance sha...@gnome.org 2011-06-27 15:19:03 EDT --- http://people.gnome.org/~shaunm/itstool-rpm/itstool.spec http://people.gnome.org/~shaunm/itstool-rpm/itstool-1.1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm I made a new release upstream. It has some new features and some fixes, but notably for the RPM, it now contains a man page, and the shebang is #!/usr/bin/python -s. I updated the spec file to remove the build root and clean stuff, per the packaging guidelines, and added the man page to the spec file. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693664] Review Request: supybot-gribble - Cross-platform support bot based on supybot
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693664 --- Comment #15 from David Riches davi...@ultracar.co.uk 2011-06-27 15:20:35 EDT --- Ok, I went ahead an got the upstream to fix the address issue... SPEC: http://dcr226.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/supybot-gribble.spec SRPM: http://dcr226.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/supybot-gribble-0.83.4.1-4.fc15.src.rpm f15 - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164573 f14 - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164571 rawhide - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164579 el6 - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164585 [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint supybot-gribble.spec supybot-gribble.spec:19: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes supybot supybot-gribble.spec:20: W: unversioned-explicit-provides /usr/bin/supybot supybot-gribble.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: supybot-gribble-20110627.tar 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ #as before [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint ../SRPMS/supybot-gribble-0.83.4.1-4.fc15.src.rpm supybot-gribble.src:19: W: unversioned-explicit-obsoletes supybot supybot-gribble.src:20: W: unversioned-explicit-provides /usr/bin/supybot supybot-gribble.src: W: invalid-url Source0: supybot-gribble-20110627.tar 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ #as before [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ rpmlint ../RPMS/noarch/supybot-gribble-0.83.4.1-4.fc15.noarch.rpm supybot-gribble.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided supybot 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. [david@drlaptop SPECS]$ #fixed address problem -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716808] Review Request: grapefruit - Python module for color information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716808 pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #1 from pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in 2011-06-27 15:24:58 EDT --- [X] Package name - ok. [?] Package group not specified. [X] Build successful - ok. [?] $ rpmlint SRPMS/grapefruit-0.1a3-1.20110627svn31.fc14.src.rpm grapefruit.src: W: invalid-url Source0: grapefruit-0.1a3svn31.tar.gz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. - Please provide valid source URL. [X] $ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/grapefruit-0.1a3-1.20110627svn31.fc14.noarch.rpm 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. - ok. [X] License ASL 2.0 - ok [?] md5sum/sha1sum of the sources in the SRPM and the one accessible from URL - https://code.google.com/p/grapefruit/downloads/list - do NOT match. [X] Install/Un-install - ok. Overall good. Nevertheless, please do fix the minor glitches like RPM groups and source URL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 714543] Review Request: maze5 - A program for generating mazes of miscellaneous styles and sizes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714543
--- Comment #7 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-06-27 15:44:35 EDT
---
Try env in SConstrust!
You forgot to require GIMP for the Plug-in.
Please put each BuildRequires on a separate line.
%{_mandir}/man1/maze5.1.gz -- Rather make that %{_mandir}/man1/maze5.1.*
The rpmlint issues are still there, I suppose. chmod +x on the plug-in .so may
solve the stripping problem.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683463] Review Request: trafficserver - Apache Traffic Server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683463 --- Comment #29 from Jan-Frode Myklebust janfr...@tanso.net 2011-06-27 15:54:32 EDT --- Rahul: thanks for the comments! I do intend to use this specfile for EPEL also, and possibly all the way back to EPEL5 -- so I'll just leave a note in the specfile for now to indicate these should be removed or ifdef'ed out for newer EPEL/Fedoras. Regarding the upstream status of the patches, I will check ASAP. And providing systemd native service file sounds like a good idea, but I would prefer to finish this for EPEL initially before starting working on rawhide/fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 Christopher Aillon cail...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #14 from Christopher Aillon cail...@redhat.com 2011-06-27 16:06:58 EDT --- Thanks for the update. F15 Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3164638 There's still an rpmlint issue, but that aside, I think this is ready for approval. itstool.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0.1-1 ['1.1.0-1.fc15', '1.1.0-1'] Please fix that by updating the rpm changelog before importing into git. Approving and sponsoring. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716844] Review Request: django-recaptcha - A Django application for adding ReCAPTCHA to a form
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716844 pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in 2011-06-27 16:12:48 EDT --- [X] Package name - ok. [?] Package group not specified. [X] Build successful - ok. [?] rpmlint SRPMS/django-recaptcha-0.1-1.fc14.src.rpm django-recaptcha.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware - middle ware, middle-ware, middleweight django-recaptcha.src: W: invalid-url Source0: django-recaptcha-0.1.tar.bz2 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. - please provide valid source URL. [?] rpmlint RPMS/noarch/django-recaptcha-0.1-1.fc14.noarch.rpm django-recaptcha.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware - middle ware, middle-ware, middleweight 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. - may be you could re-phrase it to avoid error. [X] Lincence BSD - ok. [X] Install/Un-install - ok. Overall good. Please fix the couple of errors and mention valid source URL. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716402] Review Request: ckermit - The quintessential all-purpose communications program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716402 Eric Smith e...@brouhaha.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Eric Smith e...@brouhaha.com 2011-06-27 16:18:33 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ckermit Short Description: The quintessential all-purpose communications program Owners: brouhaha Branches: f14 f15 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 702989] Review Request: itstool - Translate XML files with PO using ITS rules
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=702989 --- Comment #15 from Shaun McCance sha...@gnome.org 2011-06-27 16:22:20 EDT --- Added the changelog entry in the spec file and replaced the spec and srpm files at the above URLs. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716402] Review Request: ckermit - The quintessential all-purpose communications program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716402 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla l...@jcomserv.net 2011-06-27 16:32:24 EDT --- 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 597755] Review Request: openmolar - Open Source Dental Practice Management Software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=597755 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pin...@pingoured.fr --- Comment #15 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2011-06-27 17:05:12 EDT --- Maybe it is about time to bring this question to the devel mailing-list. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 714491] Review Request: xmodconfig - A graphical front end for xmodmap
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714491
Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||volke...@gmx.at
--- Comment #6 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-06-27 17:02:58 EDT
---
Don't install README. It only contains information on installing.
There should only be a space between BuildRequires -- no comma. It's even nicer
to put each on a separate line.
I agree with Damian on the comment. Try to rephrase that and maybe split the
sentence in two.
If you don't want to maintain this package in EPEL5 or older, you can drop the
clean section, omit the rm buildroot and remove the BuildRoot definition.
You can leave out defattr in general.
Maybe make a comment on why you rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_docdir}.
Besides these things, that are mostly not blockers, I think the file is fine.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 714336] Review Request: tetgen - A Quality Tetrahedral Mesh Generator and a 3D Delaunay Triangulator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714336 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added CC||volke...@gmx.at --- Comment #1 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-06-27 17:17:22 EDT --- I think that caption doesn't belong into the package description: TetGen is written in C++. It can be compiled into either a standalone program invoked from command-line or a library for linking with other programs. All major operating systems, e.g. Unix/Linux, MacOS, Windows, etc, are supported. There are no pictures: The following pictures respectively illustrate a 3D polyhedral domain (left), a boundary conforming Delaunay tetrahedral mesh (middle), and its dual - a Voronoi partition (right). No need to rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. It might be a good idea to include the documentation you can download from the homepage. Your CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS are not worshiped: g++ -O0 -c predicates.cxx g++ -g -Wall -DSELF_CHECK -o tetgen tetgen.cxx predicates.o -lm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693664] Review Request: supybot-gribble - Cross-platform support bot based on supybot
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693664 --- Comment #16 from Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com 2011-06-27 17:52:24 EDT --- Take a look at: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Renaming.2FReplacing_Existing_Packages I think we want the obsoletes/provides to use the versions. Fix that and I think we are ready to go... ;) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713313] Review Request: msktutil - Program for interoperability with Active Directory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=713313 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added CC||volke...@gmx.at --- Comment #1 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-06-27 17:56:21 EDT --- Please make the Makefile verbose. The INSTALL file only contains in information on installing and should thus be excluded. You don't have to label the manpages as %doc. (There is a spelling mistake in defination.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693158] Review Request: python-viper - A minimalistic scientific plotter and run-time visualization module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693158 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added CC||volke...@gmx.at --- Comment #1 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2011-06-27 18:14:02 EDT --- run--time -- I think that should be run-time. What is dolfin? (defattr is not required.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
