[Bug 727664] Review Request: florist - Open-source implementation of IEEE Standard 1003.5b-1996
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727664 Oxana Kurysheva changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Oxana Kurysheva 2011-08-10 02:44:21 EDT --- Ok. Approved -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727664] Review Request: florist - Open-source implementation of IEEE Standard 1003.5b-1996
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727664 --- Comment #4 from Pavel Zhukov 2011-08-10 02:41:06 EDT --- Fixed: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/florist/florist.spec http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/florist/florist-2011-6.fc14.src.rpm koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3263453 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727664] Review Request: florist - Open-source implementation of IEEE Standard 1003.5b-1996
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727664
--- Comment #3 from Oxana Kurysheva 2011-08-10 02:35:15
EDT ---
# MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.
>>> 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}, in the format
%{name}.spec
>>> OK
# MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines (Ada packaging
guidelines)
>>> OK
# MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
>>> OK (GPL)
# 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.
>>> OK
# MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at
least one primary architecture. [7]
>>> OK
# MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch.
>>> ATTN! Please point ExcludeArch for gnat
# 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
>>> NA
# 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
# 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.
>>> OK
# MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates.
>>> OK
# MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's
%files listings.
>>> OK
# MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example.
>>> OK
# MUST: Each package must consistently use macros.
>>> OK
# MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content.
>>> OK
# MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
>>> NA
# MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime
of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must run
properly if it is not present.
>>> OK
# MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
>>> OK
# MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
>>> NA
# MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g. libfoo.so.1.1),
then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel
package.
>>> OK
# MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release}
>>> OK
# MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.[20]
>>> OK
# MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file,
>>> NA
# MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
>>> OK
# MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8. [24]
>>> OK
Please check ATTN and fix it
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727664] Review Request: florist - Open-source implementation of IEEE Standard 1003.5b-1996
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727664 Oxana Kurysheva changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 715127] Review Request: abcMIDI - ABC to/from MIDI conversion utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715127 --- Comment #9 from Martin Gieseking 2011-08-10 02:01:56 EDT --- OK, please also add your email address to the last two %changelog entries. In order to show an understanding of the packaging guidelines, you should do a few informal reviews of other packager's submissions. When you're added to the packager group, you are allowed to review and approve packages. Thus, you should familiarize yourself with the process and practice a little bit. This also helps to attract potential sponsors. :) For further information have a look at the following wiki pages: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672555] Review Request: openicc-data - The Color Management Data (CMD)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672555 --- Comment #5 from Volker Fröhlich 2011-08-10 01:48:27 EDT --- Some quick comments: defattr is no longer needed, you can remove it. Drop the README file, as it only contains instructions for installation. Drop buildroot, clean section and the rm -rf in the install section if you don't want to package for EPEL 4 or 5. Being that specific in the file list might cause you a lot of work on every update. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729200] Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200 T.C. Hollingsworth changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727646] Review Request: link-grammar - A Grammar Checking 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=727646 hannes changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-08-10 01:00:09 --- Comment #8 from hannes 2011-08-10 01:00:09 EDT --- Build in rawhide. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729201] Review Request: zypper - Command line software manager using libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729201 --- Comment #3 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-10 00:23:14 EDT --- I made a couple minor fixes to the spec file per Miroslav Suchý's advice in bug729199. I changed nothing outside of the comments so I didn't upload a new SRPM. Spec: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tchol/fedora/zypper.spec SRPM: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tchol/fedora/zypper-1.6.14-1.fc15.src.rpm $ rpmlint SPECS/zypper.spec SPECS/zypper.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: zypper-1.6.14.tar.bz2 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693037] Review Request: perl-Test-HasVersion - Check Perl modules have version numbers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693037 --- Comment #16 from Iain Arnell 2011-08-09 23:38:16 EDT --- No problem for me, Paul. Feel free to make and push the builds if you get a chance before I do. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725837] Review Request: hexglass - Block falling puzzle game based on a hexagonal grid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725837 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||hexglass-1.2.1-3.fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-08-09 23:24:49 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725914] Review Request: php-channel-pearplex - Adds the PearPlex channel to PEAR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725914 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|php-channel-pearplex-1.3-2. |php-channel-pearplex-1.3-2. |fc15|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 725914] Review Request: php-channel-pearplex - Adds the PearPlex channel to PEAR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725914 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 23:24:16 EDT --- php-channel-pearplex-1.3-2.fc14 has been pushed to the Fedora 14 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707132] Review Request: java-service-wrapper - Java service wrapper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707132 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||java-service-wrapper-3.2.5- ||2.fc15 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 726245] Review Request: perl-Eval-LineNumbers - Add line numbers to hereis blocks that contain perl source code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726245 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-Eval-LineNumbers-0.31- ||1.fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-08-09 23:22:36 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 726245] Review Request: perl-Eval-LineNumbers - Add line numbers to hereis blocks that contain perl source code
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726245 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 23:22:31 EDT --- perl-Eval-LineNumbers-0.31-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725837] Review Request: hexglass - Block falling puzzle game based on a hexagonal grid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725837 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 23:24:43 EDT --- hexglass-1.2.1-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722781] Review Request: wmcube - Dockapp with a rotating 3d-object and the current CPU load
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722781 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 23:21:30 EDT --- wmcube-0.98-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722781] Review Request: wmcube - Dockapp with a rotating 3d-object and the current CPU load
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722781 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||wmcube-0.98-2.fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-08-09 23:21:35 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725914] Review Request: php-channel-pearplex - Adds the PearPlex channel to PEAR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725914 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 23:20:08 EDT --- php-channel-pearplex-1.3-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 707132] Review Request: java-service-wrapper - Java service wrapper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=707132 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 23:21:58 EDT --- java-service-wrapper-3.2.5-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 725914] Review Request: php-channel-pearplex - Adds the PearPlex channel to PEAR
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=725914 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||php-channel-pearplex-1.3-2. ||fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2011-08-09 23:20:13 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 713990] Review Request: bzr-fastimport - Bzr plugin for fast loading of data from other VCS 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=713990
Graeme Gillies changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ggill...@redhat.com
--- Comment #1 from Graeme Gillies 2011-08-09 23:17:05
EDT ---
Looking at the spec I see you change info.py and hg2git.py with the line
sed -e '1 { /^#!/d }' -i exporters/hg2git.py info.py
That should instead be a patch (bzr-fastimport-shebang.patch) and applied as
such. That way it can be dropped easier (if the patch gets applied upstream)
and it's more obvious that you are patching the code.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693037] Review Request: perl-Test-HasVersion - Check Perl modules have version numbers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693037 Iain Arnell changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Iain Arnell 2011-08-09 23:15:44 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Test-HasVersion New Branches: el4 el5 el6 Owners: iarnell pghmcfc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729200] Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200 --- Comment #4 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 22:32:33 EDT --- Some fixes based on Miroslav Suchý's advice in bug729199. Spec: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tchol/fedora/libzypp.spec SRPM: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tchol/fedora/libzypp-9.10.1-2.fc15.src.rpm $ rpmlint SPECS/libzypp.spec SPECS/libzypp.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: libzypp-9.10.1.tar.bz2 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/libzypp-9.10.1-2.fc15.x86_64.rpm libzypp.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libzypp-config libzypp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ZYpp -> Zippy libzypp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zypper -> zipper, zapper, gypper libzypp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US convienent -> convenient, convention, continent libzypp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repomd -> reported libzypp.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US susetags -> metatarsus libzypp.x86_64: W: invalid-url URL: http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Libzypp libzypp.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/libzypp.lr libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary package-manager-su libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary package-manager libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zypp-CheckAccessDeleted 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 9 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/libzypp-devel-9.10.1-2.fc15.x86_64.rpm libzypp-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zyPP -> zippy libzypp-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zypper -> zipper, zapper, gypper libzypp-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US convienent -> convenient, convention, continent libzypp-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US repomd -> reported libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/ProblemSolutionCombi.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Helper.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/ProblemTypes.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Types.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItem.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemInstall.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Resolver.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/ProblemSolutionIgnore.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemDelete.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/InstallOrder.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SATResolver.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemUpdate.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemInstallOneOf.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemLock.h 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 errors, 4 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729512] New: Review Request: graphite2 - Font rendering capabilities for complex non-Roman writing systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: graphite2 - Font rendering capabilities for complex non-Roman writing systems https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729512 Summary: Review Request: graphite2 - Font rendering capabilities for complex non-Roman writing systems Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: vano...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8648526/graphite2.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8648526/graphite2.spec Description: LibreOffice has stopped using graphite in favour of graphite2. This will enable LibreOffice to once again be built with support for complex scripts and ligatures. Graphite2 is a project within SIL’s Non-Roman Script Initiative and Language Software Development groups to provide rendering capabilities for complex non-Roman writing systems. Graphite can be used to create “smart fonts” capable of displaying writing systems with various complex behaviors. With respect to the Text Encoding Model, Graphite handles the "Rendering" aspect of writing system implementation. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729512] Review Request: graphite2 - Font rendering capabilities for complex non-Roman writing 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=729512 --- Comment #1 from Nicholas van Oudtshoorn 2011-08-09 21:47:58 EDT --- Ah!?!?! The SRPM Url is, of course: SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8648526/graphite2-1.0.1-1.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 729199] Review Request: satsolver - Dependency solving library for libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 T.C. Hollingsworth changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: satsolver - |Review Request: satsolver - |A new approach to package |Dependency solving library |dependency solving |for libzypp -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 --- Comment #8 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 21:16:57 EDT --- Thanks for taking a look at this. Everything is now fixed except for the man pages. Spec: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tchol/fedora/satsolver.spec SRPM: http://www.u.arizona.edu/~tchol/fedora/satsolver-0.17.2-2.fc15.src.rpm Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3263280 $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/satsolver-0.17.2-2.fc15.x86_64.rpm satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary repo2solv.sh satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary repomdxml2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mergesolv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dumpsolv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary installcheck satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deltainfoxml2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rpmdb2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary updateinfoxml2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rpmmd2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rpms2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary susetags2solv 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/satsolver-devel-0.17.2-2.fc15.x86_64.rpm satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libzypp -> Libby satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libzypp -> Libby satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US satisfiability -> insatiability, advisability satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary helix2solv satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deptestomatic 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/satsolver-demo-0.17.2-2.fc15.x86_64.rpm satsolver-demo.x86_64: W: no-documentation satsolver-demo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary solv 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 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 720085] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect - FTP client class with automatic reconnect on failure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720085 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect- |perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect- |0.3-3.el6 |0.3-3.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720086] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle - Provides a file reading interface for reading files on a remote FTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720086 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle-0.2 |perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle-0.2 |-3.el5 |-3.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710452] Review Request: unzix - A WinZix archive extractor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710452 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|unzix-0.3.0-1.fc14 |unzix-0.3.0-1.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720086] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle - Provides a file reading interface for reading files on a remote FTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720086 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 18:00:47 EDT --- perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle-0.2-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710452] Review Request: unzix - A WinZix archive extractor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710452 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 17:59:55 EDT --- unzix-0.3.0-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720086] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle - Provides a file reading interface for reading files on a remote FTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720086 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle-0.2 |perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle-0.2 |-3.fc14 |-3.el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720085] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect - FTP client class with automatic reconnect on failure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720085 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect- |perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect- |0.3-3.fc14 |0.3-3.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720086] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle - Provides a file reading interface for reading files on a remote FTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720086 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 17:59:23 EDT --- perl-Net-FTP-RetrHandle-0.2-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720085] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect - FTP client class with automatic reconnect on failure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720085 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 17:58:59 EDT --- perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect-0.3-3.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728407] Review Request: xqilla - XQuery and XPath 2.0 library, built on top of Xerces-C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728407 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 17:54:10 EDT --- Package xqilla-2.2.4-2.fc16: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing xqilla-2.2.4-2.fc16' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/xqilla-2.2.4-2.fc16 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720085] Review Request: perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect - FTP client class with automatic reconnect on failure
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720085 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 17:58:24 EDT --- perl-Net-FTP-AutoReconnect-0.3-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728403] Review Request: libepc - Easy Publish and Consume 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=728403 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 17:53:05 EDT --- Package libepc-0.4.0-1.fc16: * should fix your issue, * was pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository, * should be available at your local mirror within two days. Update it with: # su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing libepc-0.4.0-1.fc16' as soon as you are able to. Please go to the following url: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/libepc-0.4.0-1.fc16 then log in and leave karma (feedback). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 715127] Review Request: abcMIDI - ABC to/from MIDI conversion utilities
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715127 --- Comment #8 from Olivier Samyn 2011-08-09 17:06:07 EDT --- Message sent to upstream for the fsf address problem. I updated the version to the latest upstream one: 2011-08-07. Note the upstream switched to autoconf, so the build process is simplified. And I integrated the latest comments. New package version: http://www.oleastre.be/fedora/abcMIDI/20110807-1/abcMIDI.spec http://www.oleastre.be/fedora/abcMIDI/20110807-1/abcMIDI-20110807-1.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 710203] Review Request: gambas3 - IDE based on a basic interpreter with object extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710203 --- Comment #10 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 16:11:40 EDT --- Turns out that Gambas3 doesn't need those permissions at all. Silly old me. They're gone now. New SRPM: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/gambas3-2.99.1-3.fc15.src.rpm New SPEC: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/gambas3.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 596461] Review Request: lzma-sdk - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 --- Comment #60 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 16:04:48 EDT --- So, the reason I ask that question in Comment 59 is because I didn't export "C" all of the functions in the lzma-sdk library, just the ones that upx needs. If anything else wants to use other functions in the lzma-sdk from C++ code, those functions will need the same magic applied. Should be straightforward from the patch though. Here's the new SRPM and SPEC I worked up: New SRPM: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/lzma-sdk-4.6.5-5.fc15.src.rpm New SPEC: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/lzma-sdk.spec Here are the bits to fix up upx to use it: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/upx-3.07-use-lzma-sdk-lib.patch http://spot.fedorapeople.org/upx.spec I smoke tested these changes and upx successfully compressed an ELF binary and it ran afterwards. As ugly as this might be, I like this package a _LOT_ better. Unfortunately, given that I basically rewrote this package, I don't think it would be fair for me to review it. I will, however, offer to comaintain it with you (lzma-sdk, not upx). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 690728] Review Request: Nitrate - A test case management system written in Django
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690728 --- Comment #50 from James Laska 2011-08-09 15:59:50 EDT --- (In reply to comment #49) > I guess those js libraries such as prototype or livepipe or tablekit needn't > be > packaged separately, right? As I understand it ... under the current review guidelines *javascript* (not *java*) is exempted from the "No Bundled Libraries" [1] policy. From [2] ... In this RPM packaging context, the definition of the term 'library' includes: compiled third party source code resulting in shared or static linkable files, interpreted third party source code such as Python, PHP and others. At this time JavaScript intended to be served to a web browser is specifically exempted from this but this will likely change in the future. I'm not sure where the line between javascript library and javascript framework. Hopefully someone else can clarify the scope there. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/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 596461] Review Request: lzma-sdk - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 --- Comment #59 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 15:47:19 EDT --- Is upx the only consumer of this in Fedora? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728757] Review Request: gnumed - The gnumed client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728757 --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha 2011-08-09 15:05:40 EDT --- Hello, Updated spec/srpm: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/gnumed/gnumed-0.9.9-2.fc15.src.rpm http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/gnumed/gnumed.spec * Tue Aug 09 2011 Ankur Sinha - 0.9.9-2 - Remove doc dependency - Put man pages in correct sub packages - Merge subpackages, modularity isn't really required here, let docs be. - Correct license 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 717750] Review Request: lttv - Linux Trace Toolkit 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=717750 Martin Gieseking changed: What|Removed |Added CC||martin.giesek...@uos.de --- Comment #2 from Martin Gieseking 2011-08-09 15:02:11 EDT --- Hi Yannik, here are a few quick notes on your spec: - use %global rather than %define, also see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define - in order to increase legibility, please indent (line up) the text of the header fields (Summary, Name, Version, etc.) - also list all BuildRequires separately - You can drop the BuildRoot field. It's still required for EPEL < 6, though. If you want to build the package for the old EPEL distros, you have to add a %clean section and rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT at the beginning of %install. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/GuidelinesAndPolicies#Distribution_specific_guidelines - Replace LGPL v2.1 with LGPLv2, and GPL v2 with GPLv2. See here for a list of valid license abbreviations: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main - devel packages must require the corresponding base/lib package with a fully versioned dependency: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Requiring_Base_Package - add a non-empty %description to the devel package - The %description lines must not exceed 80 chars per line. Just split them appropriately. - Drop RPM_OPT_FLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS -fstack-protector-all" from the make statement as it has no effect. - as the base package seems to provide a GUI application, you must provide a .desktop file and install it properly: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingGuidelines#Desktop_files - replace %defattr(-,root,root) with %defattr(-,root,root,-) or remove it completely. It's still required if you plan to maintain the package for EPEL 4 as well. - add AUTHORS, ChangeLog, COPYING, and README to the base package (with %doc). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 714328] Review Request: xmedcon - A medical image conversion utility and 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=714328 --- Comment #12 from Ankur Sinha 2011-08-09 14:56:59 EDT --- Hi spot, Updated spec/srpm with issues corrected are here: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/xmedcon/xmedcon.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/xmedcon/xmedcon-0.10.7-4.fc15.src.rpm * Tue Aug 09 2011 Ankur Sinha - 0.10.7-4 - Move xmedcon-config to -devel - Correct requires for -devel - Add icon, scriptlets - Add desktop file, scriptlets - Add a xmedconrc.linux file in docs - Remove defattr Thank you, 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 726210] Review Request: freewrl - X3D / VRML visualization program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726210 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|t...@rasmil.dk |steve.tray...@cern.ch --- Comment #7 from Steve Traylen 2011-08-09 14:28:23 EDT --- I found the package I started on back in November. I should have looked at the sooner in this review to see what the problem was. http://cern.ch/straylen/rpms/freewrl/ If I remember correctly it was failing at that time due to it needing to be ported to xulrunner2 which has now been done. For the rpath it looks like I used the sed on libtool trick which is preferential to the chrpath which is last resort. I also split the firefox plugin to a separate package to avoid firefox as a dependency on the cmdline tool, completely up to you if you want to do this, it makes sense to me. Running your package on Fedora 15 (via an ssh -X session) $ wget http://cic.nist.gov/vrml/nistlogo.wrl $ freewrl ./nistlogo.wrl opengl version=1.4 (2.1.2 NVIDIA 270.41.06) FreeWRL got a SIGSEGV - can you please mail the file(s) to freewrl...@rogers.com with a valid subject line. Thanks. which I now remember was a problem I had. After # yum install bitstream-vera-sans-fonts bitstream-vera-sans-mono-fonts which I required for some reason it still fails run so it's not just that. Steve. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728006] Review Request: mhddfs - Fuse-based file system for unifying several mount points into one
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728006 Jameson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2011-08-09 14:12:52 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728006] Review Request: mhddfs - Fuse-based file system for unifying several mount points into one
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728006 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728006] Review Request: mhddfs - Fuse-based file system for unifying several mount points into one
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728006 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System 2011-08-09 14:10:15 EDT --- mhddfs-0.1.38-6.fc14 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 14. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/mhddfs-0.1.38-6.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 693037] Review Request: perl-Test-HasVersion - Check Perl modules have version numbers
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693037 Paul Howarth changed: What|Removed |Added CC||p...@city-fan.org --- Comment #14 from Paul Howarth 2011-08-09 13:35:32 EDT --- I'd like to request EPEL (4/5/6) branches of this package please. I'm happy to maintain them if Iain doesn't want to. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596461] Review Request: lzma-sdk - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 --- Comment #58 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 13:31:05 EDT --- C and C++. I'd like that too. They don't seem interested, and my C-fu is insufficent to make it so, though if someone could point me in the right general direction I'd take a shot at it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728662] Review Request: python-pylibmc - Memcached client 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=728662 --- Comment #5 from Ankur Sinha 2011-08-09 13:24:39 EDT --- Praveen, Please correct the permissions for the soname: >From rpmlint: python-pylibmc.x86_64: E: non-standard-executable-perm /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/_pylibmc.so 0775L 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 596461] Review Request: lzma-sdk - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 --- Comment #57 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 13:16:03 EDT --- Is UPX using the C interface? I'd still rather see it link to a library, with headers in a -devel. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596461] Review Request: lzma-sdk - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 --- Comment #56 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 13:12:47 EDT --- Yes, and those don't work with UPX, which is the whole problem. This was suggested as a way to sort of bundle but in one place so we could find and rebuild packages using it. I agree, it's ugly as sin, but unless there's a better idea, it's this, it's remove LZMA support from UPX, or it's remove UPX from Fedora. I hate this. I really do. But I don't see another way forward. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 692069] Review Request: pps-tools - LinuxPPS user-space 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=692069
Ankur Sinha changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha 2011-08-09 13:08:54
EDT ---
Hello,
I was just wondering if it would be better to link it like this:
ln -s $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/timepps.h $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/sys
instead of
ln -s ../timepps.h $RPM_BUILD_ROOT%{_includedir}/sys
The rest looks good!
[ankur@ankur SRPMS]$ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/result/*.rpm
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppsbind
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppswatch
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppsfind
pps-tools.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ppstest
pps-tools.src: W: invalid-url Source0: pps-tools-20100413git74c32c.tar.gz
pps-tools-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/pps-tools/timepps.h
pps-tools-devel.i686: W: no-documentation
pps-tools-devel.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/timepps.h
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 6 warnings.
Please do request upstream to correct the FSF address.
XX APPROVED XX
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596461] Review Request: lzma-sdk - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 --- Comment #55 from Jason Tibbitts 2011-08-09 13:08:03 EDT --- I had completely forgotten about this. >From what I gather, the idea is to simply "work around" our rules against bundling by sticking the bundled source out into a separate package. It still gets compiled as source by the build system of the consuming package. I think this is marginally better than simply bundling, because (assuming multiple consumers) there's one obvious place where bugs should be fixed and it can be determined what needs to be rebuilt. Honestly I don't see it as functionally any different than a static library in that respect. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 596461] Review Request: lzma-sdk - SDK for lzma compression
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=596461 --- Comment #54 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 13:00:22 EDT --- This package has a unique layout, it isn't divided by base/devel like most of Fedora's packages, because this code isn't actually built, it's just dropped in /usr/share. Is the idea that other packages will BuildRequires: this SDK package, then build the SDK code directly into their applications? If so, I'm a bit uncomfortable with that approach, since it is effectively bundling copies of the lzma-SDK into other packages. Especially since we already seem to have more recent (and compiled) versions of this code in the "lzma" package. If this is just an issue of the older lzma being needed because of incompatibilities with the newer "lzma" package, I'd rather see this be a compat library 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 726210] Review Request: freewrl - X3D / VRML visualization program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726210 --- Comment #6 from Tim Lauridsen 2011-08-09 12:58:37 EDT --- Sorry Steve, I missed you have taken the review. Please assign it to yourself :) The md5sum issue must be something with my review helper script. So I have no outstanding issues :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710203] Review Request: gambas3 - IDE based on a basic interpreter with object extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710203 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 12:57:03 EDT --- Momma always said, if upstream does something insecure, fix it. I mean she didn't, but I could call her and . .. never mind. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 692069] Review Request: pps-tools - LinuxPPS user-space 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=692069 --- Comment #3 from Miroslav Lichvar 2011-08-09 12:49:05 EDT --- Thanks for the review. I've updated the spec to include the README and copyright files and also included a symlink in /usr/include/sys for better compatibility. The devel package shouldn't need anything from the base package. http://mlichvar.fedorapeople.org/tmp/pps-tools-0-0.2.20100413git74c32c.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 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 --- Comment #7 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-09 12:40:25 EDT --- Scratch build in koji (you can do it yourself too even if you are not packager yet): http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3262301 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3262302&name=build.log CMake Error at /usr/share/cmake/Modules/FindPackageHandleStandardArgs.cmake:91 (MESSAGE): Please install 'check' and 'check-devel' packages (missing: CHECK_LIBRARY CHECK_INCLUDE_DIR) You are missing some Buildrequires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710203] Review Request: gambas3 - IDE based on a basic interpreter with object extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710203 --- Comment #8 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 12:30:08 EDT --- Hm. Point taken. I'll try to think of some other way to do this, if nothing else, I'll just break the examples functionality. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710203] Review Request: gambas3 - IDE based on a basic interpreter with object extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710203 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 12:21:05 EDT --- So there's no way if I edit an example to do something nefarious on my kids's machine, then when my daughter runs the example, it can't email her private files to my son? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710203] Review Request: gambas3 - IDE based on a basic interpreter with object extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710203 --- Comment #6 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 12:08:39 EDT --- Without it, the examples don't work. The IDE assumes the examples are present in that directory and in that state, and displays them on startup. Either they keep this permission set (just like Gambas1 and Gambas2), or I get bug reports and upstream complaining that I'm not in compliance with their packaging standard. I don't see world-writable example files in a contained directory below /usr/share as a concern. Odd, yes, but not a blocker. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 692069] Review Request: pps-tools - LinuxPPS user-space 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=692069
--- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha 2011-08-09 12:05:25
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
^^
Please include debian/copyright in the package's %doc section.
Is the README worth including in %docs.
+ Spec in American English
+ Spec is legible.
+ Sources match upstream md5sum:
^^^
git archives, checked with diff:
[ankur@ankur pps-tools]$ pwd
/home/ankur/dump/pps-tools
[ankur@ankur pps-tools]$ diff -ur ../../rpmbuild/SOURCES/pps-tools/ ./
Only in ./: .git
- Package needs ExcludeArch
+ BuildRequires correct
- Spec handles locales/find_lang
- Package is relocatable and has a reason to be.
+ Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
+ Package has a correct %clean section.
+ Package has correct buildroot
%{_tmppath}/%{name}-%{version}-%{release}-root-%(%{__id_u} -n)
^^
If you're not building for rhel etc., you can get rid of the above 3 portions.
+ Package is code or permissible content.
- Doc subpackage needed/used.
+ Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.
+ Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage.
^^
Even though there's only one header, I think we should leave it in the -devel
package.
- 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}
^^
The devel is only a header. No sonames or anything here. Don't think this is
required. Need to confirm.
- .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.
+ final provides and requires are sane:
== pps-tools-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pps-tools = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
pps-tools(x86-32) = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
Requires:
/bin/sh
libc.so.6
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3.4)
rtld(GNU_HASH)
== pps-tools-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.src.rpm ==
Provides:
Requires:
== pps-tools-debuginfo-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pps-tools-debuginfo = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
pps-tools-debuginfo(x86-32) = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
Requires:
== pps-tools-devel-0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17.i686.rpm ==
Provides:
pps-tools-devel = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
pps-tools-devel(x86-32) = 0-0.1.20100413git74c32c.fc17
Requires:
SHOULD Items:
+ Should build in mock.
+ Should build on all supported archs
^^ builds on both i386 and x86_64
- Should function as described.
- Should have sane scriptlets.
+ Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend.
Not required for this package.
+ Should have dist tag
+ Should package latest version
- check for outstanding bugs on package. (For core merge reviews)
Issues:
1. Only the license/docs need to be included.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199
--- Comment #6 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-09 12:04:59 EDT
---
You should really do better job with description. Additionally all descriptions
must end with dot.
> make %{?jobs:-j %jobs}
You should use _smp_mflags macro:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Parallel_make
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710203] Review Request: gambas3 - IDE based on a basic interpreter with object extensions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710203 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 12:00:05 EDT --- Created attachment 517439 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=517439 rpmlint Yeah, it's a lot, so I'm not pasting, I'm attaching. It's mostly bad fsf address, with the perm issues and some shebangless scripts tossed in. I agree with Hans, but am willing to entertain a compelling argument to the contrary. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199
--- Comment #5 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-09 11:57:15 EDT
---
> rpmlint satsolver-0.17.2-1.fc15.src.rpm
> satsolver.src:101: W: macro-in-%changelog %3AFactory
> satsolver.src:101: W: macro-in-comment %3AFactory
You must double that percent char, even in that commend
> satsolver.src: W: invalid-url Source0: satsolver-0.17.2.tar.bz2
You have in spec:
# download from https://github.com/openSUSE/sat-solver
Source: %{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2
This in not enough. That url offer you just download of HEAD of master branch.
And it may change every day or even every hour. You need something
reproducible. If upstream does not provide tar.gz you should use something
like:
# downloaded from
https://github.com/openSUSE/sat-solver/commit/b9ef5a9a67d20d330c7b9f88c8a684d84a4166e2
# which is tar.gz of commit b9ef5a9a67d20d330c7b9f88c8a684d84a4166e2 in master
branch
Source: %{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 Miroslav Suchý changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msu...@redhat.com --- Comment #4 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-09 11:43:43 EDT --- I recommend you to write the man page. And add it to this package as patch or sent it to upstream. If you have problem writing man page or you never done it, I recommend you: http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/ http://www.methods.co.nz/asciidoc/asciidoc.1.txt You can write man page using wiki syntax very quickly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728757] Review Request: gnumed - The gnumed client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728757 Miroslav Lichvar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mlich...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mlich...@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 714328] Review Request: xmedcon - A medical image conversion utility and 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=714328
Tom "spot" Callaway changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #11 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09
11:34:33 EDT ---
== Review ==
Here are the must fix items:
* The xmedcon-config binary belongs in the -devel subpackage.
* The -devel package must require the main subpackage with %{?_isa}:
Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release}
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Requires
This prevents mismatch in multilib scenarios.
* There must be a desktop file (and an icon) for xmedcon.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Desktop_files
You might ask upstream for an icon, or use one of the generic icons for an
image tool.
Here are the optional fixes:
* You're using %defattr(-,root,root,-) in %files sections, but this is now the
default in all active Fedora branches. Consider removing it, although, this
is not a blocker.
== Details ==
- rpmlint checks return:
xmedcon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Acr -> Ac, Ar, Apr
xmedcon.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US uPET -> u Pet, PET, u PET
xmedcon.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Acr -> Ac, Ar, Apr
xmedcon.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US uPET -> u Pet, PET, u
PET
xmedcon-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libmdc -> libido
All spelling errors safe to ignore.
xmedcon.x86_64: W: shared-lib-calls-exit /usr/lib64/libmdc.so.2.0.1
exit@GLIBC_2.2.5
Safe to ignore.
xmedcon.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/bin/xmedcon-config
The xmedcon-config binary belongs in the -devel subpackage, this is a must-fix.
xmedcon.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/xmedcon-0.10.7/COPYING.LIB
xmedcon.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/doc/xmedcon-0.10.7/COPYING
xmedcon-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/xmedcon-devel-0.10.7/COPYING.LIB
xmedcon-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/xmedcon-devel-0.10.7/COPYING
Please inform the xmedcon upstream that they are using an outdated copy of the
FSF license texts with the old FSF address, and ask them to please update this
in their next release.
- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (LGPLv2+ and Copyright only and MIT and BSD and libtiff) OK, text in
%doc, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream:
bc76d1edbe8e65bbea8afeca8a1d44a7d5e286a1befb5d42a743d1bfc6fe5016
- package compiles on devel (koji scratch OK)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc affects runtime
- desktop file missing
- devel package ok (except for misplaced xmedcon-config binary)
- no .la files
- post/postun ldconfig ok
- devel requires base package n-v-r, but is missing %{_isa}
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 692069] Review Request: pps-tools - LinuxPPS user-space 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=692069 Ankur Sinha changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||sanjay.an...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sanjay.an...@gmail.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 726210] Review Request: freewrl - X3D / VRML visualization program
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=726210 --- Comment #5 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2011-08-09 10:42:35 EDT --- I'm not sure why Tim is getting sum mismatches on the source tarball, I've downloaded several times now and I get e9baa64e551483dbfcb21e879fdf0d8e each time, and it looks like Steve does too. As to the other file, there is no upstream source because I generated the README.FreeWRL.Java. shared-lib-calls-exit is just sloppy code, but it isn't a blocker, IMHO. Dropped the Requires: pkgconfig, it is no longer necessary. Deleted the appleOSX/ dir in %prep. libEAI-devel requires libEAI, and libEAI contains COPYING and COPYING.LESSER, so there is no license need to require the freewrl package. New SPEC: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/freewrl.spec New SRPM: http://spot.fedorapeople.org/freewrl-1.22.12-0.2.pre2.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 727541] Review Request: comoonics-base-py - base libs for comoonics-cdsl-py and comoonics-cluster-py
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727541 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 10:10:01 EDT --- Unretired rawhide, please take ownership in pkgdb. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 714328] Review Request: xmedcon - A medical image conversion utility and 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=714328 --- Comment #10 from Ankur Sinha 2011-08-09 09:51:13 EDT --- http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3261863 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 714328] Review Request: xmedcon - A medical image conversion utility and 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=714328 --- Comment #9 from Ankur Sinha 2011-08-09 09:48:02 EDT --- Hello, http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/xmedcon/xmedcon.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/xmedcon/xmedcon-0.10.7-3.fc15.src.rpm * Tue Aug 09 2011 Ankur Sinha - 0.10.7-3 - Fix license tag - remove rpath - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=714328#c3 - Fix sed 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 675050] Review Request: cloudfs - Cloud Filesystem
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=675050 Kaleb KEITHLEY changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|kkeit...@redhat.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727541] Review Request: comoonics-base-py - base libs for comoonics-cdsl-py and comoonics-cluster-py
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727541 Nils Philippsen changed: What|Removed |Added Component|comoonics-base-py |Package Review AssignedTo|gri...@atix.de |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #5 from Nils Philippsen 2011-08-09 09:30:03 EDT --- This ticket should remain on the "Package Review" component. Mind that you don't need a new branch for "devel" (Rawhide), but for Fedora 16 -- note the pkgdb entry: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/comoonics-base-py -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722829] Review Request: python-bottle-sqlite - SQLite3 integration for Bottle Python WSGI 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=722829 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 09:20:07 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727541] Review Request: comoonics-base-py - base libs for comoonics-cdsl-py and comoonics-cluster-py
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727541 Marc Grimme changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gri...@atix.de Component|Package Review |comoonics-base-py AssignedTo|nphil...@redhat.com |gri...@atix.de Flag|fedora-review+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Marc Grimme 2011-08-09 09:20:27 EDT --- Package Change Request == Package Name: comoonics-base-py New Branches: rawhide Owners: elcody02 This package has been orphaned but is still needed for the packages comoonics-cdsl-py and comoonics-cluster-py as requirement. I've taken ownership of this package and would like to request a retirement of this package for rawhide fc16. Thanks Marc. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 689815] Review Request: perl-MooseX-Role-TraitConstructor - Wrapper for new that can accept a traits parameter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=689815 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 09:18:34 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728207] Review request: retrace-client - Client application for Retrace server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728207 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-08-09 09:20:38 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672555] Review Request: openicc-data - The Color Management Data (CMD)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672555 --- Comment #4 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) 2011-08-09 09:08:47 EDT --- Spec URL: http://kwizart.fedorapeople.org/review/openicc-data.spec SRPM URL: http://kwizart.fedorapeople.org/review/openicc-data-1.2.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: The Color Management Data (CMD) Changelog: - Update to 1.2.0 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727541] Review Request: comoonics-base-py - base libs for comoonics-cdsl-py and comoonics-cluster-py
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727541 Nils Philippsen changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Nils Philippsen 2011-08-09 09:01:59 EDT --- - GOOD: rpmlint run on current spec file/SRPM built from it doesn't flag any issues. - GOOD: dist tag added - GOOD: matches python packaging guidelines: - GOOD: requires python2-devel for building - GOOD: uses supplied %python_sitelib macro on Fedora >= 13 - GOOD: license field matches actual license - GOOD: package is written in American English (spelling errors corrected) - GOOD: sources used to build the package match the upstream source This package is APPROVED. Please continue with your part of the package review process -- cf. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_Review_Process#Contributor -- your next step (#8) is to make the SCM admin request to get the package out of retirement/undeprecated for Rawhide/devel and the branch created for Fedora 16. And take care of that if you roll new tarballs that they get new versions. 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 674085] Review Request: rubygem-virt - Simplied interface to use ruby the libvirt 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=674085 --- Comment #2 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-09 08:56:35 EDT --- You are missing requires for ruby-libvirt or more precisely for ruby(libvirt). Since you install Rakefile you probably should require rubygem-bundler as well. Note, that I stop searching after I find those two missing dependecies, so there may be others. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729203] Review Request: fedora-package-config-zypp - Fedora package repository configuration for zypper
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729203 --- Comment #1 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 08:56:43 EDT --- $ rpmlint SPECS/fedora-package-config-zypp.spec SPECS/fedora-package-config-zypp.spec:9: W: unversioned-explicit-provides libzypp-config SPECS/fedora-package-config-zypp.spec: W: no-%build-section 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/noarch/fedora-package-config-zypp-1-1.noarch.rpm fedora-package-config-zypp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) zypper -> zipper, zapper, gypper fedora-package-config-zypp.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zypper -> zipper, zapper, gypper fedora-package-config-zypp.noarch: W: no-url-tag fedora-package-config-zypp.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729201] Review Request: zypper - Command line software manager using libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729201 --- Comment #2 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 08:53:45 EDT --- Oops, supposed to do binary RPM. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/zypper-1.6.14-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm zypper.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libzypp -> Libby zypper.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/zypp-refresh.lr zypper.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/zypper.lr zypper.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc /etc/bash_completion.d/zypper.sh zypper.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zypp-refresh-wrapper zypper.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zypp-refresh zypper.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary installation_sources 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 5 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/zypper-log-1.6.14-1.fc15.x86_64.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 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 --- Comment #3 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 08:52:54 EDT --- Oops, wrong tab. Sorry for the noise, folks. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/satsolver-0.17.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary repo2solv.sh satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary repomdxml2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary mergesolv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary dumpsolv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary installcheck satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deltainfoxml2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rpmdb2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary updateinfoxml2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rpmmd2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rpms2solv satsolver.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary susetags2solv 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/satsolver-devel-0.17.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary helix2solv satsolver-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary deptestomatic 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/satsolver-demo-0.17.2-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm satsolver-demo.x86_64: W: no-documentation satsolver-demo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary solv 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 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 729200] Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200 --- Comment #3 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 08:47:26 EDT --- Sorry, that should have been on the binary RPM. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/libzypp-9.10.1-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libzypp.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libzypp-config libzypp.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/libzypp.lr libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary package-manager-su libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary package-manager libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zypp-CheckAccessDeleted 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/libzypp-devel-9.10.1-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/ProblemSolutionCombi.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Helper.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/ProblemTypes.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Types.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItem.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemInstall.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Resolver.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/ProblemSolutionIgnore.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemDelete.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/InstallOrder.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SATResolver.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemUpdate.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemInstallOneOf.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemLock.h 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 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 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 --- Comment #2 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 08:45:56 EDT --- Sorry, should have done the binary RPM, not the SRPM. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/libzypp-9.10.1-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libzypp.x86_64: E: explicit-lib-dependency libzypp-config libzypp.x86_64: E: incoherent-logrotate-file /etc/logrotate.d/libzypp.lr libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary package-manager-su libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary package-manager libzypp.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary zypp-CheckAccessDeleted 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/libzypp-devel-9.10.1-1.fc15.x86_64.rpm libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/ProblemSolutionCombi.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Helper.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/ProblemTypes.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Types.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItem.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemInstall.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/Resolver.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/ProblemSolutionIgnore.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemDelete.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/InstallOrder.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SATResolver.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemUpdate.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemInstallOneOf.h libzypp-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/zypp/solver/detail/SolverQueueItemLock.h 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 14 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 674085] Review Request: rubygem-virt - Simplied interface to use ruby the libvirt 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=674085 --- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-08-09 08:45:21 EDT --- rubygem-virt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Simplied -> Implied, S implied, Simplified %description does not sound as english to me :) Description have to end with dot. rubygem-virt.src: W: no-%prep-section rubygem-virt.src: W: no-%build-section This section should be present, and should be empty. And just courious question: why did you start new project, when there is for long time: http://libvirt.org/ruby/ ? Hmm, did I understood correctly, that it provides simplified interface to ruby-libvirt? Otherwise it seem OK from the first view. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 729199] Review Request: satsolver - A new approach to package dependency solving
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729199 --- Comment #1 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 08:35:36 EDT --- $ rpmlint SPECS/satsolver.spec SPECS/satsolver.spec:101: W: macro-in-%changelog %3AFactory SPECS/satsolver.spec:101: W: macro-in-comment %3AFactory SPECS/satsolver.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: satsolver-0.17.2.tar.bz2 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint SRPMS/satsolver-0.17.2-1.fc15.src.rpm satsolver.src:101: W: macro-in-%changelog %3AFactory satsolver.src:101: W: macro-in-comment %3AFactory satsolver.src: W: invalid-url Source0: satsolver-0.17.2.tar.bz2 1 packages and 0 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 729200] Review Request: libzypp - Package, Patch, Pattern, and Product Management
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729200
--- Comment #2 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09
08:34:27 EDT ---
$ rpmlint SPECS/libzypp.spec
SPECS/libzypp.spec:20: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
SPECS/libzypp.spec:167: W: macro-in-%changelog %3AFactory
SPECS/libzypp.spec:167: W: macro-in-comment %3AFactory
SPECS/libzypp.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: libzypp-9.10.1.tar.bz2
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
$ rpmlint SRPMS/libzypp-9.10.1-1.fc15.src.rpm
libzypp.src:20: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
libzypp.src:167: W: macro-in-%changelog %3AFactory
libzypp.src:167: W: macro-in-comment %3AFactory
libzypp.src: W: invalid-url Source0: libzypp-9.10.1.tar.bz2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 727541] Review Request: comoonics-base-py - base libs for comoonics-cdsl-py and comoonics-cluster-py
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=727541 --- Comment #2 from Marc Grimme 2011-08-09 08:35:00 EDT --- All negative passes should now be fixed. I've also taken the last sources from comoonics-base-py-0.1-5 from fc15 and updated the uploaded 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 729201] Review Request: zypper - Command line software manager using libzypp
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=729201 --- Comment #1 from T.C. Hollingsworth 2011-08-09 08:32:42 EDT --- $ rpmlint SPECS/zypper.spec SPECS/zypper.spec:120: W: macro-in-%changelog %3AFactory SPECS/zypper.spec:120: W: macro-in-comment %3AFactory SPECS/zypper.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: zypper-1.6.14.tar.bz2 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. $ rpmlint SRPMS/zypper-1.6.14-1.fc15.src.rpm zypper.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libzypp -> Libby zypper.src:120: W: macro-in-%changelog %3AFactory zypper.src:120: W: macro-in-comment %3AFactory zypper.src: W: invalid-url Source0: zypper-1.6.14.tar.bz2 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 674085] Review Request: rubygem-virt - Simplied interface to use ruby the libvirt 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=674085 Miroslav Suchý changed: What|Removed |Added CC||msu...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|msu...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
