[Bug 720989] Review Request: python-setuptools_hg - Setuptools plugin for finding files under Mercurial version control
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720989 Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 02:13:10 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-setuptools_hg Short Description: Setuptools plugin for finding files under Mercurial version control Owners: kumarpraveen Branches: f14 f15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720664] Review Request: django-threaded-multihost - Enable multi-site awareness in Django apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720664 --- Comment #8 from pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in 2011-07-14 02:47:29 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) Note to Pjp: Please do a scratch build and paste the url in the review before approving if the submitted hasn't done so. Always good to verify this anyway. Aah...ok, I'll do that. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720664] Review Request: django-threaded-multihost - Enable multi-site awareness in Django apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720664 --- Comment #9 from pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in 2011-07-14 02:50:31 EDT --- Yeah, the koji build fails. - http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3198037 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721061] Review Request: rubygem-sunspot - Library for expressive, powerful interaction with the Solr search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721061 --- Comment #1 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 02:51:49 EDT --- Created attachment 512815 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=512815 RSolr 1.0 compatiblity patch The RSolr review was submitted for RSolr 1.0, therefore this patch would be needed in case this gem should be 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 670209] Review Request: rubygem-rsolr - A Ruby client for Apache Solr
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=670209 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||721061 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721061] Review Request: rubygem-sunspot - Library for expressive, powerful interaction with the Solr search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721061 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||721062 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721061] Review Request: rubygem-sunspot - Library for expressive, powerful interaction with the Solr search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721061 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||693646 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721062] Review Request: rubygem-sunspot_rails - Rails integration for the Sunspot Solr search 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=721062 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vondr...@redhat.com Depends on||721061 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721061] Review Request: rubygem-sunspot - Library for expressive, powerful interaction with the Solr search engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721061 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vondr...@redhat.com Depends on||670209 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693646] Review Request: apache-solr - Open source enterprise search platform from the Apache Lucene project
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693646 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||721061 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719854] Review Request: rubygem-xmlparser-0.6.81-1 - Ruby bindings to the Expat XML parsing 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=719854 --- Comment #18 from Ulrich Schwickerath ulrich.schwicker...@cern.ch 2011-07-14 03:27:19 EDT --- http://uschwick.web.cern.ch/uschwick/software/rubygem-xmlparser.spec http://uschwick.web.cern.ch/uschwick/software/rubygem-xmlparser-0.6.81-5.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 197641] Review Request: ode - High performance library for simulating rigid body dynamics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=197641 Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 04:30:06 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: ode New Branches: el6 Owners: s4504kr Jochen Schmitt, who already maintains the el5 branch for ode would also like to maintain an el6 branch of ode, and that is fine by me (the Fedora owner). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 716299] Review Request: clipit - lightweight, fully featured GTK+ clipboard manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716299
--- Comment #9 from Nikos Roussos ni...@autoverse.net 2011-07-14 05:16:51 EDT
---
I fixed the errors. In details:
- I made a list of features on the description to beautify it.
- Added gettext as build requirement
- Added xdotool as requirement
- Removed the deprecated Application category from .desktop file
- Added rm -rf %{buildroot} on %install section for compatibility reasons.
- I added the necessary commands in order to update gtk icons cache, although I
couldn't find what does the %posttrans section. Please guide me.
- I added the patch fixing the German translation inconsistency. I also sent it
upstream:
http://sf.net/tracker/?func=detailaid=3367028group_id=369179atid=1538558
Many thankns on both of you.
SPEC: http://comzeradd.fedorapeople.org/clipit/clipit.spec
SRPM:
http://repos.fedorapeople.org/repos/comzeradd/autoverse/fedora-15/SRPMS/clipit-1.4.1-3.fc15.src.rpm
rpmlint is good.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 696052] Review Request: texlive-tetex-cmsuper - The CM-Super font set
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=696052 --- Comment #9 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 05:47:23 EDT --- Ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 #14 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 05:48:10 EDT --- Ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #4 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 06:00:35 EDT --- Split out a couple of previously bundled dependencies and updated to the latest upstream release http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/askbot.spec http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/packages/askbot-0.7.7-1.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 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 Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #19 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 06:03:49 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: django-recaptcha New Branches: f15 Owners: sundaram pjp 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 720141] Review Request: python-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=720141 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-07-14 06:23:22 EDT --- python-grapefruit-0.1a3-2.20110710svn31.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-grapefruit-0.1a3-2.20110710svn31.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717019 --- Comment #7 from Jan F. Chadima jchad...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 08:16:34 EDT --- This software is Copyright (C) 2006-2010 Fachhochschule Hannover (University of Applied Sciences and Arts) Use is subject to license conditions. The main licensing options available are: Open Source Licensing. This is the appropriate option if you want to share the source code of your application with everyone you distribute it to, and you also want to give them the right to share who uses it. If you wish to use TNC@FHH under Open Source Licensing, you must contribute all your source code to the open source community in accordance with the GPL Version 2 when your application is distributed. See http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html Commercial Licensing. This is the appropriate option if you are creating proprietary applications and you are not prepared to distribute and share the source code of your application. Contact tr...@f4-i.fh-hannover.de for details. http://trust.inform.fh-hannover.de/ -snip-- This is NOT the GPLv2 license. This is not listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses. This is some kind of dual license, probably acceptable. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 712923] Review Request: gnome-contacts - Contacts manager for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=712923 Bug 712923 depends on bug 710421, which changed state. Bug 710421 Summary: vala-0.13.1 is available https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710421 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||RAWHIDE Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 678728] Review Request: synce-connector - Connection framework and dccm-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=678728 --- Comment #5 from Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de 2011-07-14 08:41:52 EDT --- Rawhide build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3198492 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720804] Review Request: kross-interpreters - Kross interpreters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720804 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jrez...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@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 720804] Review Request: kross-interpreters - Kross interpreters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720804 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 09:17:36 EDT --- Name: ok Summary: ok License: ok URL: ok Sources: ok (md5sum 3050eb299dbc665775e394ab8e536972) BRs: ok Subpackages: ok Macros used consistently: ok No docs: please contact upstream to create proper releases of the splitted packages Ldconfig not needed as it contains kross plugins. rpmlint kross-interpreters.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Really simple review, 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 679401] Review Request: qtsoap - The Simple Object Access Protocol Qt-based client side 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=679401 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(wm...@wm161.net) --- Comment #11 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 09:23:46 EDT --- Trever, could you share your SPEC file with me (the one Rex is talking about)? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721066] Review Request: rubygem-image_factory_console - QMF Console for Aeolus Image Factory
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721066
Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||clala...@redhat.com
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|clala...@redhat.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 09:38:56
EDT ---
Initial review:
1) There is no COPYING or LICENSE file in the sources. We should fix that in
the upstream aeolus repository, to make it clear what license this particular
piece of code is under.
2) Even if we take the GPLv2+ as the license (which is what the rest of the
conductor is under), the license listed in the SPEC is wrong. It says GPLv2+
or Ruby, which is not true; it is just GPLv2+
3) No need for a BuildRoot anymore
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag)
4) No need for a %clean section anymore
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean)
5) No need for %defattr in %files
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions)
6) We probably want to make the Requires: rubygems and BuildRequires: rubygems
into Requires: ruby(rubygems) and BuildRequires: ruby(rubygems), respectively.
[ OK ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package
[ OK ] MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines
[ OK ] MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name} [...]
[ FAIL ] MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines
The Source of the package must be the full URL to the released Gem archive
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Gems
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL - clalance: this is a bit
problematic in that we don't have releases separate from the main conductor
code. We should probably follow the recommendations in the SourceURL link
above and put a comment in describing how to generate the gem.
[ OK ] MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license
and meet the Licensing Guidelines
[ FAIL ] MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the
actual license
[ OK ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of
the license(s) for the package must be included in %doc
[ OK ] 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. Reviewers should use md5sum for
this task. If no upstream URL can be specified for this package,
please see the Source URL Guidelines for how to deal with this.
[ OK ] MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary
rpms on at least one primary architecture
[ N/A ] MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on
an architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the
spec in ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST
have a bug filed in bugzilla, describing the reason that the package
does not compile/build/work on that architecture. The bug number MUST
be placed in a comment, next to the corresponding ExcludeArch line
[ OK ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except
for any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging
Guidelines ; inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply
common sense.
[ N/A ] 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: 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.
[ OK ] 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 package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
[ OK ] MUST: Permissions on
[Bug 720804] Review Request: kross-interpreters - Kross interpreters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720804 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2011-07-14 09:48:12 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: kross-interpreters Short Description: Kross interpreters Owners: than rdieter jreznik ltinkl rnovacek Branches: f15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721069] Review Request: rubygem-aeolus-cli - Commandline interface for working with the Aeolus cloud suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721069 Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||clala...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|clala...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 09:48:31 EDT --- I'm going to take this one, but before we do anything with it, I think I'm going to rename the upstream rubygem to aeolus-image. It just makes more sense that way. I'll come back around to this once that is done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630184] Review Request: lxappearance-obconf - Plugin to configure Openbox inside LXAppearance
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630184 --- Comment #5 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2011-07-14 09:57:29 EDT --- Sure, but it depends on how complex your package is because I am really busy ATM. I have updated the package once again: SPEC: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lxappearance-obconf.spec SRPM: http://cwickert.fedorapeople.org/review/lxappearance-obconf-0.1.0-0.1.20110714git3a0fd02d.fc16.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 717019] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717019 Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||182235(FE-Legal) --- Comment #8 from Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 09:59:13 EDT --- This is NOT the GPLv2 license. This is not listed in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing#Good_Licenses. This is some kind of dual license, probably acceptable. This IS GPLv2 license. Meaning, we have a choice which license to use (with the only limit that with GPLv2 we cannot develop proprietary products, which you cannot otherwise, given GPLv2 “stickiness”) and we have chosen GPLv2. Setting FE-LEGAL as well to be sure. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719342] Review Request: okular - A document 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=719342 Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jrez...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jrez...@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 630184] Review Request: lxappearance-obconf - Plugin to configure Openbox inside LXAppearance
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630184 Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|hobbes1...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 10:09:42 EDT --- Don't worry about mine, I managed a review swap for them. I'll go ahead and take this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] 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. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717019 Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||tcall...@redhat.com Blocks|182235(FE-Legal)| --- Comment #9 from Tom spot Callaway tcall...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 10:13:19 EDT --- I agree with Matej, there are two choices, and we choose GPLv2. This is a or, not an and scenario. :) Lifting FE-Legal. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630184] Review Request: lxappearance-obconf - Plugin to configure Openbox inside LXAppearance
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630184
--- Comment #7 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 10:20:10 EDT
---
Hmm... I wonder what it would take to update the Review Request template to
include what branches the package is expected to be released for. That way it
would be easier to know if things like:
BuildRoot, rm -rf $RPM_BUILDROOT in %install, %clean, and %{defattr... are
needed in the spec file.
Are you planning on any EPEL releases?
Thanks,
Richard
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630184] Review Request: lxappearance-obconf - Plugin to configure Openbox inside LXAppearance
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630184 --- Comment #8 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org 2011-07-14 10:29:38 EDT --- (In reply to comment #7) Are you planning on any EPEL releases? Not really, I don't consider LXDE mature enough although people urge me to release it. Nevertheless I usually keep rm -rf $RPM_BUILDROOT etc in the specs for backwards compatibility. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719342] Review Request: okular - A document 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=719342
Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Jaroslav Reznik jrez...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 10:31:30
EDT ---
Name: ok
Summary:
License: ok
URL: I think anyone from this three is ok, still better than just kde.org
Sources: ok (md5sum 021e4ad479bb88937084d4510d1e1218)
BRs: ok
Conflicts: ok
Desktop file validation: ok
Updated icon cache: ok
Macros used consistently: ok
Docs: ok
Ldconfig: ok
Devel contains .so: ok, library itself in -lib subpackage
rpmlint okular.spec
okular.spec:84: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot}
okular.spec:84: W: macro-in-comment %{_kde4_libdir}
#unpackaged files - commented out but contains libgwenview, is it intended?
otherwise please remove this line
okular.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/4.6.90/src/okular-4.6.90.tar.bz2 urlopen
error ftp error: 550 Failed to change directory.
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
APPROVED, just fix the rpmlint issue
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720040] Review Request: pugixml - A light-weight C++ XML processing library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720040
Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 10:39:35
EDT ---
Review:
+ OK
- NA
? ISSUE
+ Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
+ Spec file matches base package name.
+ Spec has consistant macro usage.
+ Meets Packaging Guidelines.
+ License
+ License field in spec matches
+ License file included in package
+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
+ Sources match upstream md5sum:
[ankur@ankur rpmbuild]$ md5sum pugixml-1.0.tar.gz SOURCES/pugixml-1.0.tar.gz
3c191771b942e805fe36d6a00b2655f8 pugixml-1.0.tar.gz
3c191771b942e805fe36d6a00b2655f8 SOURCES/pugixml-1.0.tar.gz
- Package needs ExcludeArch
+ BuildRequires correct
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
+ Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
+ Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
+ Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
+ Spec has needed ldconfig in post and postun
- .pc files in -devel subpackage/requires pkgconfig
+ .so files in -devel subpackage.
+ -devel package Requires: %{name} = %{version}-%{release}
- .la files are removed.
- Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file
+ Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
+ Package has no duplicate files in %files.
+ Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
+ Package owns all the directories it creates.
+ No rpmlint output.
[ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint pugixml-1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm
../SRPMS/pugixml-1.0-1.fc14.src.rpm
/var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/*.rpm
6 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
+- final provides and requires are sane:
[ankur@ankur result]$ review-req-check
== pugixml-1.0-1.fc16.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
libpugixml.so.1.0
pugixml = 1.0-1.fc16
pugixml(x86-32) = 1.0-1.fc16
Requires:
/sbin/ldconfig
/sbin/ldconfig
libc.so.6
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.11)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)
libgcc_s.so.1
libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)
libm.so.6
libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
libm.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)
libstdc++.so.6
libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)
libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
== pugixml-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm ==
Provides:
Requires:
cmake
== pugixml-debuginfo-1.0-1.fc16.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pugixml-debuginfo = 1.0-1.fc16
pugixml-debuginfo(x86-32) = 1.0-1.fc16
Requires:
== pugixml-devel-1.0-1.fc16.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pugixml-devel = 1.0-1.fc16
pugixml-devel(x86-32) = 1.0-1.fc16
Requires:
libpugixml.so.1.0
pugixml = 1.0-1.fc16
SHOULD Items:
+ Should build in mock.
+ Should build on all supported archs
+ Should function as described.
+ Should have sane scriptlets.
+ Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
+ Should have dist tag
+ Should package latest version
- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)
Issues:
1. defattr is no longer needed, you can remove it :)
Thank you for an *excellent* package!
XXX APPROVED XXX
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998 --- Comment #1 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 10:41:18 EDT --- Updated spec/srpm: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/opennl/OpenNL-3.2.1-2.fc15.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/opennl/OpenNL.spec * Thu Jul 14 2011 Ankur Sinha ankursinha AT fedoraproject DOT org - 3.2.1-2 - add patch to correct libname and versioning (courtesy of Richard Shaw) 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 716299] Review Request: clipit - lightweight, fully featured GTK+ clipboard manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=716299 --- Comment #10 from Elder Marco elderma...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 10:41:23 EDT --- Hi Nikos, %pretrans and %posttrans are run before and after a transaction. A brief explanation here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Syntax and here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Scriptlet_Ordering About rpm transactions: http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedora_Draft_Documentation/0.1/html/RPM_Guide/ch-transactions.html It's a draft, but very useful. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722187] New: Review Request: usbredir - USB network redirection protocol libraries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: usbredir - USB network redirection protocol libraries https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722187 Summary: Review Request: usbredir - USB network redirection protocol libraries Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: hdego...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/usbredir.spec SRPM URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~jwrdegoede/usbredir-0.3-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: usbredir is a protocol for redirection USB traffic from a single USB device, to a different (virtual) machine then the one to which the USB device is attached. This package contains a number of libraries to help implementing support for usbredir: usbredirparser: A library containing the parser for the usbredir protocol usbredirhost: A library implementing the usb-host side of a usbredir connection. All that an application wishing to implement an usb-host needs to do is: * Provide a libusb device handle for the device * Provide write and read callbacks for the actual transport of usbredir data * Monitor for usbredir and libusb read/write events and call their handlers -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611068] Review Request: django-picklefield - Implementation of a pickled object field
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611068 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-07-14 10:47:59 EDT --- django-picklefield-0.1.9-1.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/django-picklefield-0.1.9-1.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 611068] Review Request: django-picklefield - Implementation of a pickled object field
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611068 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2011-07-14 10:48:14 EDT --- django-picklefield-0.1.9-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/django-picklefield-0.1.9-1.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717966] Review Request: python-psphere - vSphere SDK for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717966 --- Comment #11 from Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 11:14:34 EDT --- OK, the upstream maintainer responded. He: a) Changed the license to ASL 2.0, which I've updated in the SPEC and b) Done a formal release of psphere 0.1.4 upstream. Based on this, I took the tarball from his release and used that to generate a new package. It is available here: SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/clalance/python-psphere/python-psphere.spec SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/clalance/python-psphere/python-psphere-0.1.4-1.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722192] New: Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722192 Summary: Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: da...@dms-audio.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: Spec file is in original tar.bz2 SRPM URL: http://www.dms-audio.com/system/files/pan-0.135-1.src_.rpm Description: Fedora 14 is still using the old 0.133 version of Pan news reader which has quite a few bugs and issues. v0.134 and 0.135 has since been released this year 2011 with many updates and fixes. Fixes since 0.133 http://git.gnome.org/browse/pan2/plain/ChangeLog srpm and rpm builds http://www.dms-audio.com/pan-0.135 I have built the binary i386 and i686 from source. I am not sure if any package maintainer is working on pan these days ? I have a fedora account (dms) and completed the requirements such as ssh key but I do not have any repo space on fedora people and not sure how to create such space. I would like to contribute and for someone to add this package to the fc14 testing repo x86 and build the x64 version. I have installed koji and the fedora-packager files and followed the guide so far until I got stuck !! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722192] Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722192 David Marsh da...@dms-audio.com changed: What|Removed |Added URL||http://www.dms-audio.com/pa ||n-0.135 Version|rawhide |14 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722198] New: Review Request: tnef - TNEF attachment unpacker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: tnef - TNEF attachment unpacker https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722198 Summary: Review Request: tnef - TNEF attachment unpacker Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: and...@topdog.za.net QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/tnef/tnef.spec SRPM URL: http://topdog-software.com/oss/SRPMS/fedora/tnef/tnef-1.4.8-1.src.rpm Description: This package unpacks MIME attachments of type application/ms-tnef. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722204] New: Review Request: calligra - An integrated office suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: calligra - An integrated office suite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722204 Summary: Review Request: calligra - An integrated office suite Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rdie...@math.unl.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/calligra/calligra.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/calligra/calligra-2.3.73-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: An integrated office suite. A fork/successor to koffice (why it includes all the Obsoletes tags) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721179] Review Request: rubygem-extlib - Support library for DataMapper and Merb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721179
Ulrich Schwickerath ulrich.schwicker...@cern.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ulrich.schwicker...@cern.ch
--- Comment #1 from Ulrich Schwickerath ulrich.schwicker...@cern.ch
2011-07-14 11:41:09 EDT ---
Hi, Shawn,
you say you need it for building OpenNebula ? Which version ? Version 2.2.1
seems to run and compile fine without rubygem-extlib.
Few comments:
1/
%global ruby_sitelib %(ruby -rrbconfig -e puts Config::CONFIG['sitelibdir'])
should be conditional, eg something like this:
%{!?ruby_sitelib: %global ruby_sitearch %(ruby -rrbconfig -e puts
Config::CONFIG['sitearchdir'])}
2/ in %setup, better do
%setup -q -c -T
cp %{SOURCE0} %{gemname}-%{version}.gem
and then in %build use %{gemname}-%{version}.gem instead of %{SOURCE0}
(Not an expert myself on this, I was asked myself to do it this way although
the twiki states to do it the way you do it. Twiki should be changed I think,
as well as many other packages)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722205] New: Review Request: calligra-l10n - Language files for calligra
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: calligra-l10n - Language files for calligra https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722205 Summary: Review Request: calligra-l10n - Language files for calligra Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: rdie...@math.unl.edu QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/calligra/calligra-l10n.spec SRPM URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/calligra/calligra-l10n-2.3.73-1.fc15.src.rpm Description: Language files for calligra -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722204] Review Request: calligra - An integrated office suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722204 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||656997(kde-reviews) Alias||calligra -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 481428] Review Request: rednotebook - A desktop diary
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=481428 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? Bug 481428 depends on bug 439667, which changed state. Bug 439667 Summary: gnome-python2-gtkmozembed python module crashes using example https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=439667 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED --- Comment #24 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-07-14 11:43:48 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: rednotebook New Branches: el6 Owners: fab 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 722204] Review Request: calligra - An integrated office suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722204 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||722205(calligra-l10n) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722205] Review Request: calligra-l10n - Language files for calligra
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722205 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||656997(kde-reviews) Depends on||722204(calligra) Alias||calligra-l10n -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998 --- Comment #2 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 11:53:22 EDT --- Hey, Just some quick questions about the spec file. I'm pretty sure my patch update had cmake creating the correct library symlinks. Is there a particular reason you want to create them manually? Also, since you've hardcoded the names in %install and %files, you'll have to fix this on every version change. Other than that, everything looks good. I'm pulling the srpm now for the usual checks. Richard -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 630184] Review Request: lxappearance-obconf - Plugin to configure Openbox inside LXAppearance
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=630184 --- Comment #9 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 12:09:59 EDT --- Bear with me, I'm still trying to figure out the intricacies of licensing but from the COPYING file I would think this should be LGPLv2, see comment from Fedora license matrix: Note that this license was originally referred to as the GNU Library General Public License v2, but all current versions (v2.1 or newer) of the license are correctly known as the GNU Lesser General Public License. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719328] Review Request: gwenview - An image 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=719328 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719341] Review Request: ksnapshot - A screen capture utility
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719341 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719343] Review Request: svgpart - SVG plugin for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719343 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719342] Review Request: okular - A document 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=719342 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719339] Review Request: ksaneplugin - KDE snan service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719339 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719338] Review Request: kruler - A screen ruler and color measurement tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719338 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720804] Review Request: kross-interpreters - Kross interpreters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720804 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719345] Review Request: kdegraphics-thumbnailers - Thumbnailers for various graphic types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719345 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 697483] Review Request: django-celery - Django Celery Integration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=697483 Bug 697483 depends on bug 611277, which changed state. Bug 611277 Summary: Review Request: python-celery - Task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611277 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|NEW |CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611277] Review Request: python-celery - Task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611277 Bug 611277 depends on bug 691115, which changed state. Bug 691115 Summary: Review Request: python-kombu - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691115 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 696527] Review Request: django-kombu - Kombu transport using the Django database as a message store
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=696527 Bug 696527 depends on bug 691115, which changed state. Bug 691115 Summary: Review Request: python-kombu - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691115 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611277] Review Request: python-celery - Task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611277 Bug 611277 depends on bug 611040, which changed state. Bug 611040 Summary: Review Request: python-importlib - Backport of importlib.import_module() from Python 2.7 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611040 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||WONTFIX Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611277] Review Request: python-celery - Task queue/job queue based on distributed message passing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611277 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-07-14 12:44:06 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-07-14 12:44:06 EDT --- No, at the moment I have no time to work on this package and I don't want to block your work. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 611040] Review Request: python-importlib - Backport of importlib.import_module() from Python 2.7
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611040 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-07-14 12:42:54 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-07-14 12:42:54 EDT --- No, at the moment I have no time to work on 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 691115] Review Request: python-kombu - AMQP Messaging Framework for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691115 Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||WONTFIX Last Closed||2011-07-14 12:42:27 Bug 691115 depends on bug 691114, which changed state. Bug 691114 Summary: Review Request: python-msgpack - A MessagePack (de)serializer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691114 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #10 from Fabian Affolter fab...@bernewireless.net 2011-07-14 12:42:27 EDT --- No, at the moment I have no time to work on 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 719344] Review Request: kdegraphics-strigi-analyzer - Strigi analyzers for various graphic types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719344 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||712882(kde-4.7) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721112] Review Request: vmtk - The Vascular Modeling Toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721112 --- Comment #1 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 12:50:21 EDT --- Cleaned up rpmlint errors. Now there are only warnings http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/vmtk/vmtk-0.9.0-2.fc15.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/vmtk/vmtk.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 683127] Review Request: tpm-quote-tools - TPM-based attestation using the TPM quote operation (tools)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683127 --- Comment #22 from William Lima wl...@primate.com.br 2011-07-14 12:50:49 EDT --- SPECS/tpm-quote-tools.spec:44: W: macro-in-%changelog %makeinstall SPECS/tpm-quote-tools.spec:47: W: macro-in-%changelog %changelog SPECS/tpm-quote-tools.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: tpm-quote-tools-1.0.tar.gz - Fix RPM macros in changelog (%%name instead of %name). - Use Source0 instead of Source alias. - Put link of gzip'ed tarball on Source0. - I would change your Group tag to Applications/System. - README says it requires tpm-tools. If so, add explicit require on tpm-tools. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717966] Review Request: python-psphere - vSphere SDK for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717966 Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|mar...@redhat.com |clala...@redhat.com Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #12 from Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 12:56:36 EDT --- Awesome, looks perfect now! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998
--- Comment #3 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 12:55:42
EDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Hey,
Just some quick questions about the spec file.
I'm pretty sure my patch update had cmake creating the correct library
symlinks. Is there a particular reason you want to create them manually? Also,
since you've hardcoded the names in %install and %files, you'll have to fix
this on every version change.
Really?
With this in the spec:
--
# Install includes
install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_includedir}/NL/
cp -av src/NL/nl.h $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_includedir}/
find src/NL/ -name *.h ! -name nl.h -execdir cp -av '{}'
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_includedir}/NL/ \;
# Create the .so symlinks
#pushd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}
#ln -sfv libopennl.so.3.2.1 libopennl.so
#ln -sfv libopennl.so.3.2.1 libopennl.so.3
#popd
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
%files
%doc doc
#%{_libdir}/libopennl.so.3.2.1
#%{_libdir}/libopennl.so.3
%files devel
%doc examples
#%{_libdir}/libopennl.so
%{_includedir}/*
---
mock fails saying this:
DEBUG: Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1
DEBUG: Processing files: OpenNL-debuginfo-3.2.1-2.fc16.i686
DEBUG: Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files
/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/OpenNL-3.2.1-2.fc16.i386
DEBUG: error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
DEBUG:/usr/lib/libopennl.so.3.2.1
DEBUG: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found:
DEBUG:/usr/lib/libopennl.so.3.2.1
DEBUG: RPM build errors:
--
which is why I created the symlinks manually. rpmlint also spewed the no
shared library symlink error. Can you please recheck once? I don't think it
generated the symlinks.
I can replace use macros in the spec. I'll go do that :)
Other than that, everything looks good. I'm pulling the srpm now for the usual
checks.
Richard
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 688886] Review Request: kflickr - Standalone Flickr Uploader
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=66
Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||needinfo?(jan.klepek@gmail.
||com)
--- Comment #9 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2011-07-14 12:59:56 EDT
---
Sorry for the delay.
1. SHOULD: take a look at a template for advice, like,
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE#Best_Practices
and take advantage of some %_kde4_* macros we have.
2. MUST: use
Requires: kdebase-runtime%{?_kde4_version: = %{_kde4_version}}
(instead of -libs)
the stuff at the end just adds some extra versioning information, to ensure the
built rpm is run against at least the kde version used to build it.
3. MUST: fix icon scriptlets, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
4. SHOULD: drop the convoluted locale handling, and just use something like
%find_lang %{name} --with-kde
Naming OK
License ok
sources ok
a242994345de077c2a4bd07968cc217a kflickr-20100817.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 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998 --- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 13:04:18 EDT --- http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/opennl/OpenNL-3.2.1-3.fc15.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/opennl/OpenNL.spec * Thu Jul 14 2011 Ankur Sinha ankursinha AT fedoraproject DOT org - 3.2.1-3 - add version macros to soname etc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 632056] Review Request: libsocialweb-qt - Qt4 API for libsocialweb client DBUS 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=632056 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||needinfo?(supercyper1@gmail ||.com) --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2011-07-14 13:03:32 EDT --- ping? (I'll let this go another week or 2 before closing it out due to inactivity) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] 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.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717019
--- Comment #10 from Jan F. Chadima jchad...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 13:03:48
EDT ---
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.
OK: the LICENSE file is in %doc
MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK: AFAIK it is.
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. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK: both file are identical
MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture.
OK: tested on x86_64
MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line.
NOT TESTED YET.
MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK:
MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
OK: No localews there
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.
OK: %post %postun correct
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.
OK:
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717966] Review Request: python-psphere - vSphere SDK for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717966 --- Comment #13 from Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 13:08:31 EDT --- Thanks Mark. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717966] Review Request: python-psphere - vSphere SDK for Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717966 Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Chris Lalancette clala...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 13:09:15 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-psphere Short Description: vSphere SDK for Python Owners: clalance -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518546] Review Request: libva - VAAPI video playback acceleration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518546 Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktdre...@ktdreyer.com Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #95 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com 2011-07-14 13:08:59 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libva New Branches: el6 Owners: ktdreyer Discussed with Adam, and I'll be maintaining the EL-6 branch. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722192] Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722192 Bill Nottingham nott...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||a...@dalloz.de, ||mpet...@mac.com Component|Package Review |pan AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|a...@dalloz.de -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722192] Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722192 Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ita...@ispbrasil.com.br --- Comment #1 from Itamar Reis Peixoto ita...@ispbrasil.com.br 2011-07-14 13:25:07 EDT --- I think you should post a patch against current pan spec file. fedpkg clone pan -a make changes and test git diff post the patch here, -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 717345] csync2-1.34 - cluster synchronization tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=717345
--- Comment #8 from Luis Bazan lba...@bakertillypanama.com 2011-07-14
13:42:25 EDT ---
SPEC URL:http://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/csync2.spec
SRPM URL:http://lbazan.fedorapeople.org/csync2-1.34-7.fc15.src.rpm
Url: fixed
remove documents ChangeLog, NEWS, TODO and INSTALL contain nothing
add paper.pdf
change to %{_mandir}/man1/csync2.1.*
BuildRequires change to one per line
fixed incoherent version in changelog
$ rpmlint -n csync2.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint csync2.spec
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint csync2-1.34-7.fc15.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint -v csync2-1.34-7.fc15.src.rpm
csync2.src: I: checking
csync2.src: I: checking-url http://oss.linbit.com/csync2/ (timeout 10 seconds)
csync2.src: I: checking-url http://oss.linbit.com/csync2/csync2-1.34.tar.gz
(timeout 10 seconds)
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
$ rpmlint -i csync2-1.34-7.fc15.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 518546] Review Request: libva - VAAPI video playback acceleration
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=518546 Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? | --- Comment #96 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) kwiz...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 13:51:48 EDT --- I denied this CVS request. the driver that would make this wrapper anything usefull isn't capable to run on the libdrm version in EL6. This request is dangerously pointless -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720998] Review Request: OpenNL - A library for solving sparse linear systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720998
--- Comment #5 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 13:51:40 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #3)
(In reply to comment #2)
Hey,
Just some quick questions about the spec file.
I'm pretty sure my patch update had cmake creating the correct library
symlinks. Is there a particular reason you want to create them manually?
Also,
since you've hardcoded the names in %install and %files, you'll have to fix
this on every version change.
Really?
Yup! But I was concentrating so much on the build/cmake side I forgot to update
the install side. My Fault!
With this in the spec:
--
# Install includes
install -d $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_includedir}/NL/
cp -av src/NL/nl.h $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_includedir}/
find src/NL/ -name *.h ! -name nl.h -execdir cp -av '{}'
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_includedir}/NL/ \;
# Create the .so symlinks
#pushd $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}
#ln -sfv libopennl.so.3.2.1 libopennl.so
#ln -sfv libopennl.so.3.2.1 libopennl.so.3
#popd
%post -p /sbin/ldconfig
%postun -p /sbin/ldconfig
%files
%doc doc
#%{_libdir}/libopennl.so.3.2.1
#%{_libdir}/libopennl.so.3
They're not commented out in mine but I instead used one line:
%{_libdir}/libopennl.so.*
That way it picks up all the versioned libraries and leaves the .so for the
-devel package.
To fix %install I first need to understand why you're using the install
command. Generally mkdir and cp (with appropriate option, -p, -a, -r, etc.) is
sufficient. In my spec files (and many others I've learned from) install is
generally used to correct things like permissions. Cmake *SHOULD* create
libraries with correct permissions. If not, rpmlint will complain about it.
That being said I think the library portion of %install could look like this:
%install
# Install library files
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}
cp -p build/linux-Release/binaries/lib/libopennl.so*
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{_libdir}/
Which will copy the library and symlinks (instead of just the library, which is
what I forgot to fix). Also all the above changes will make all the global
variables at the top of the spec unnecessary.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722249] New: Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722249 Summary: Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: sanjay.an...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Spec URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/hl7/python-hl7.spec SRPM URL: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/hl7/python-hl7-0.1.1_xml.4-0.1.20110714git97ddbe9.fc15.src.rpm Description: python-hl7 is a simple library for parsing messages of Health Level 7 (HL7) v2.x and v3.x into Python objects. Some documentation for an older version can be seen at http://python-hl7.readthedocs.org/en/latest/ -- [ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint ../SPECS/python-hl7.spec python-hl7-0.1.1_xml.4-0.1.20110714git97ddbe9.fc15.src.rpm /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/*.rpm ../SPECS/python-hl7.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: python-hl7-20110714.tar.gz python-hl7.src: W: invalid-url Source0: python-hl7-20110714.tar.gz python-hl7.src: W: invalid-url Source0: python-hl7-20110714.tar.gz 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722249] Review Request: python-hl7 - Python library parsing HL7 v2.x and v3.x messages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722249 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||673841(fedora-medical) Alias||python-hl7 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720040] Review Request: pugixml - A light-weight C++ XML processing library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720040 Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Richard Shaw hobbes1...@gmail.com 2011-07-14 14:27:52 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pugixml Short Description: A light-weight C++ XML processing library Owners: hobbes1069 Branches: f14 f15 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 720857] Review Request: datalog - A Lightweight Deductive Database using Datalog
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720857 --- Comment #2 from John D. Ramsdell ramsd...@mitre.org 2011-07-14 14:42:02 EDT --- Hold it. There are more changes to the spec required. I'm working on it. Also, the development site for this project is http://sf.net/projects/datalog. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683127] Review Request: tpm-quote-tools - TPM-based attestation using the TPM quote operation (tools)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683127 --- Comment #23 from John D. Ramsdell ramsd...@mitre.org 2011-07-14 14:51:10 EDT --- (In reply to comment #22) - Fix RPM macros in changelog (%%name instead of %name). Done - Use Source0 instead of Source alias. Done - Put link of gzip'ed tarball on Source0. Done, but there is a problem. See below. - I would change your Group tag to Applications/System. Done. - README says it requires tpm-tools. If so, add explicit require on tpm-tools. I added a comment to the README that says when tpm-tools are needed. You only need them to take ownership of a TPM. TPM Quote Tools are used for attestation using an owned TPM. Now on to the problem. I set up a TPM Quote Tools project on SourceForge. The sources are available by cloning the Git repository at http://sf.net/projects/tpmquotetools. I cannot figure out how to specify a URL to the source gzip'd tarball that doesn't time out. Right now, the spec points to my NEU account, but I delete old versions due to disk space limitations. Does anyone know how to specify a project URL that doesn't time out on SourceForge? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683127] Review Request: tpm-quote-tools - TPM-based attestation using the TPM quote operation (tools)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=683127 --- Comment #24 from John D. Ramsdell ramsd...@mitre.org 2011-07-14 14:52:44 EDT --- The new files are: http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ramsdell/tools/tpm-quote-tools.spec http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ramsdell/tools/tpm-quote-tools-1.0-6.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 668820] Review Request: rubygem-rdoc - RDoc produces HTML and command-line documentation for Ruby projects
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668820
--- Comment #18 from Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 15:12:35 EDT ---
Updated SPEC: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-rdoc.spec
Updated SRPM: http://mo.morsi.org/files/rpms/rubygem-rdoc-3.8-1.fc15.src.rpm
Koji Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3199490
(In reply to comment #2)
* Please consider updating to the latest version (3.5.1 atm)
Done, updated to the latest (3.8)
* MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
- Please review the licensing. At appears that the package is GPLv2 and some
custom license, where some files are MIT (lib/rdoc/task.rb) or Ruby
licensed
Done. Package includes GPLv2, MIT, and Ruby licenses.
* Cleaning
- %clean section is no longer needed (on Fedora):
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean
Done, clean section removed.
* Documentation
- Please do not disable documentation generation, since ruby forces
installation of ruby-rdoc, therefore rdoc should be available prior the
gem
installation
- Please consider to provide the documentation in -doc subpackage
Its seems there is an issue w/ parsing the rubygem-rdoc documentation w/
ruby-rdoc. Whenever I re-enable the --rdoc, I get the following parse error:
Generating HTML...
ERROR: While generating documentation for rdoc-3.8
... MESSAGE: Unhandled special: Special: type=17, text=!-- --
... RDOC args: --op
/home/mmorsi/rpmbuild/BUILD/rubygem-rdoc-3.8/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rdoc-3.8/rdoc
--main README.txt lib History.txt LICENSE.txt Manifest.txt README.txt RI.txt
Rakefile --title rdoc-3.8 Documentation
Grepping the source, it seems the offending line is in History.txt. Since from
the rpm spec's perspective installing History.txt and parsing it w/ rdoc is an
atomic operation, I've disabled the rdoc generation for the time being.
Added a documentation subpackage, and re-enabled ri generation.
* Requires
- BuildRequires: rubygem(minitest) is needed for text execution
Done
* Tests
- Please execute test suite using following command:
ruby -I../lib -e Dir.glob('test/test_*').each {|t| require t}
This allows you to avoid build dependency on rake, hoe, rubyforge and
neither
ZenTest is required IMO.
./lib/rdoc/task.rb:36 requires 'rake' and 'rake/tasklib'. Had to add
rubygem(rake) as Requires and a BuildRequires
Regardless, to get rid of rubygem(hoe) I implemented your suggestion.
(In reply to comment #8)
P.S. It is interesting that in Ruby, there were left bundled RDoc, which is
against Fedora policy anyway. Of course it is not the only one library bundled
in Ruby.
True but you have to recall that rdoc was originally part of the Ruby package
then got forked off into the gem. At some point it wouldn't surprise me if it
was dropped from ruby internally all together (though this would make it harder
for rdoc support in rubygems and what not).
(In reply to comment #16)
(In reply to comment #15)
Mo, I did not payed enough attention to this issue when I did the original
review, but re-reviewing the spec again, it might be really the best solution
just to ignore/delete the gem rdoc executable as you did in the package,
since:
Actually this is what the original submission has. It just removes the bin
directory all together.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 721179] Review Request: rubygem-extlib - Support library for DataMapper and Merb
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=721179 --- Comment #2 from Shawn Starr shawn.st...@rogers.com 2011-07-14 16:06:43 EDT --- Actually, for OpenNebula 3.0, that is coming. I'm working with upstream on their requirements. For #1, conditional? but isn't that explicit with this being a rubygem? so you would have ruby as a BuildRequires anyway? For #2 Can change that sure, this .spec file came from EPEL6 with very minor changes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719067] Review Request: rubygem-hmac - This module provides common interface to HMAC functionality
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719067 Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mmo...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmo...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 16:13:02 EDT --- Taking this one -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693126] Review Request: openvas-administrator - Administrator Module for the Open Vulnerability Assessment System (OpenVAS)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693126 Siem Korteweg s...@xs4all.nl changed: What|Removed |Added CC||s...@xs4all.nl --- Comment #2 from Siem Korteweg s...@xs4all.nl 2011-07-14 16:18:01 EDT --- Some remarks, as this is not a formal review. - the source rpm is for FC14, not FC15 - rpmbuild failed: extend the Buildrequires with gcc and xmltoman - you do not need a %clean script: refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean - systemd is required for init-scripts for Fedora 15+: refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SysVInitScript#Initscripts_in_addition_to_systemd_unit_files this also affects the current Requires - sqlite-devel is not required for building after removing this rpm and removing its Buildrequires from the spec file, the rpmbuild succeeded and all files in the new rpm have the same size as before - why do you require file /usr/bin/xsltproc and not the rpm libxslt it is contained 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 719067] Review Request: rubygem-hmac - This module provides common interface to HMAC functionality
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719067 --- Comment #2 from Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 16:19:33 EDT --- Overall looks good, koji build is green: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3199493 A few specific nuances though: - please replace all the %defines at the top w/ %globals http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define - please enable --ri documentaion on the gem install command - lib/hmac.rb is licensed under the ruby license and thus the package license must be set to MIT and Ruby accordingly - please mark the test directory as %doc - since the test directory is included, it wouldn't be a bad idea to include a %check section to run the suite - you need a Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 and a BuildRequires: ruby as instructed here http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#Ruby_Packaging_Guidelines -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719975] Review Request: rubygem-chunky_png - Pure ruby library for read/write, chunk-level access to PNG files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719975 Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mmo...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mmo...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 17:35:36 EDT --- Taking this one -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 719975] Review Request: rubygem-chunky_png - Pure ruby library for read/write, chunk-level access to PNG files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719975 Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Mo Morsi mmo...@redhat.com 2011-07-14 17:40:18 EDT --- Overall looks good. Koji build is green: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3199631 Specific notes: - the requires rubygem(rake) and rubygem(rspec) should be changed to buildrequires. Since the gem ships w/ a spec suite, it should be invoked in a %check section - need a Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 and a BuildRequires: ruby - include a --ri flag in the gem install command - rpmlint complains about the following hidden files which should be removed: .yardopts, .gitignore, .infinity_test (not sure what the last one is and/or if it's needed) - the following files should be marked as %doc in the %files section: spec/ directory, license, readme, rakefile, chunky_png.gemspec, benchmarks - consider dropping the also have a look at oilypng... blurb from the package description -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722192] Review Request: Pan-0.135.i686.fc14 - Pan 5th June 2011
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722192 --- Comment #2 from David Marsh da...@dms-audio.com 2011-07-14 17:57:13 EDT --- Created attachment 513270 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=513270 Original spec file from pan author Maybe someone can take this over. I am new to this process. I have been using Fedora since core 1 and can compile and build rpms but have little idea about the correct process of working within the fedora package environment. Not sure if the spec file should be altered from that provided by the author. Attached is the original spec file for pan-0.135 from the tar source. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
