[Bug 736577] Review Request: ghc-snap-core - Snap web framework core 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=736577 Bug 736577 depends on bug 751917, which changed state. Bug 751917 Summary: Review Request: ghc-zlib-enum - Enumerator interface for zlib compression https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751917 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #12 from Jens Petersen 2011-12-16 02:24:01 EST --- Update to 0.6: Srpm: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-snap-core/ghc-snap-core.spec Spec: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-snap-core/ghc-snap-core-0.6.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3588254 Note 0.7 requires a newer version of attoparsec than we currently have. I guess we can update to it when moving to ghc-7.4. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 736577] Review Request: ghc-snap-core - Snap web framework core 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=736577 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||Ready -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 736801] Review Request: pure-gen - A Pure C bindings generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736801 --- Comment #9 from Jens Petersen 2011-12-16 01:23:11 EST --- Ping, Michel - if you still want this could you put in SCM request? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758966] Review Request: ghc-warp - Fast webserver library for WAI apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758966 --- Comment #1 from Jens Petersen 2011-12-15 23:44:44 EST --- Updating to 0.4.6.2 Spec: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-warp/ghc-warp.spec Srpm: http://petersen.fedorapeople.org/reviews/ghc-warp/ghc-warp-0.4.6.2-1.fc16.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3588212 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758966] Review Request: ghc-warp - Fast webserver library for WAI apps
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758966 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status Whiteboard||Ready -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 756386] Review Request: ghc-unordered-containers - Efficient hashing-based container types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756386 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 21:58:34 EST --- ghc-unordered-containers-0.1.4.3-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-unordered-containers-0.1.4.3-1.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 756386] Review Request: ghc-unordered-containers - Efficient hashing-based container types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756386 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 21:58:26 EST --- ghc-unordered-containers-0.1.4.3-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-unordered-containers-0.1.4.3-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 756386] Review Request: ghc-unordered-containers - Efficient hashing-based container types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756386 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 758958] Review Request: ghc-simple-sendfile - Cross-platform sendfile system call
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758958 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 21:47:57 EST --- ghc-simple-sendfile-0.1.3-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-simple-sendfile-0.1.3-1.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758958] Review Request: ghc-simple-sendfile - Cross-platform sendfile system call
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758958 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 758958] Review Request: ghc-simple-sendfile - Cross-platform sendfile system call
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758958 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 21:48:05 EST --- ghc-simple-sendfile-0.1.3-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-simple-sendfile-0.1.3-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759045] Review Request: ghc-base16-bytestring - ByteString hex encoding and decoding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759045 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 759045] Review Request: ghc-base16-bytestring - ByteString hex encoding and decoding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759045 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 21:43:53 EST --- ghc-base16-bytestring-0.1.1.3-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-base16-bytestring-0.1.1.3-1.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759045] Review Request: ghc-base16-bytestring - ByteString hex encoding and decoding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759045 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 21:44:22 EST --- ghc-base16-bytestring-0.1.1.3-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ghc-base16-bytestring-0.1.1.3-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 766916] Review Request: grinder - tool for synchronizing yum repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=766916 --- Comment #2 from John Matthews 2011-12-15 21:31:07 EST --- Thanks Jeff. I've added your suggestions in grinder 0.0.136. SRPM: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/g/r/grinder/grinder-0.0.136-1.fc14.src.rpm SPEC: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/g/r/grinder/grinder.spec %description A tool for synchronizing content such as packages, distributions, and errata from yum repositories. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758958] Review Request: ghc-simple-sendfile - Cross-platform sendfile system call
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758958 --- Comment #4 from Jens Petersen 2011-12-15 21:29:44 EST --- Thanks I fixed the typo after importing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759712] Review Request: dragonegg - GCC plugin to use LLVM optimizers and code generators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759712 --- Comment #4 from Eric Smith 2011-12-15 19:38:53 EST --- Thanks for reviewing this. I agree with your patch for REVISION, will include it in the next spec, and will report a bug upstream if there isn't one already. I'll look into the gcc dependency issue with rawhide. I didn't have that problem when I built the llvm-3.0rc3 and dragonegg packages on F16. I'll install rawhide in a VM for testing and report back when I have an updated spec and SRPM that fixes it. I respectfully disagree with changing the macro-in-comment warnings as they are in comments copied directly from the existing gcc-python-plugin spec, and doubled percent signs might be confusing to anyone trying to actually understand the comments. I'd rather have the rpmlint warnings. However, if you really feel strongly that those warnings have to be fixed, let me know, and I'll do it. LLVM is supported on i386 and x86_64, which are the current Fedora Primary Architectures. The Fedora llvm package spec excludes use of ocaml on s390, s390x, and sparc64, but does not exclude those or any other architectures. While I have a hard time believing that LLVM will work on all of the Fedora Secondary Architectures, if the LLVM spec doesn't exclude them I don't think the DragonEgg spec needs to either. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759712] Review Request: dragonegg - GCC plugin to use LLVM optimizers and code generators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759712
Jerry James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Jerry James 2011-12-15 19:14:33 EST
---
I'll take this review. Quick note: the %defattr in %files is no longer needed.
Also, I had some kind of problem with the gcc versioning. I tried to install
after building:
# rpm -i dragonegg-3.0-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm
error: Failed dependencies:
gcc = 4.6.2-1.fc17 is needed by dragonegg-3.0-1.fc17.x86_64
# rpm -q gcc
gcc-4.6.2-1.fc17.1.x86_64
Legend:
+: OK
-: must be fixed
=: should be fixed (at your discretion)
N: not applicable
MUST:
[+] rpmlint output:
dragonegg.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) optimizers -> optimizer,
optimizes, optimize rs
dragonegg.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US optimizers ->
optimizer, optimizes, optimize rs
dragonegg.spec:12: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
dragonegg.spec:12: W: macro-in-comment %{release}
dragonegg.spec:19: W: macro-in-comment %{gcc_version}
dragonegg.spec:20: W: macro-in-comment %{gcc_release}
dragonegg.spec:22: W: macro-in-comment %{version}
dragonegg.spec:22: W: macro-in-comment %{gcc_release}
dragonegg.spec:76: W: macro-in-comment %{optflags}
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.
Those macros in comments need doubled % signs.
[+] follows package naming guidelines
[+] spec file base name matches package name
[+] package meets the packaging guidelines
[+] package uses a Fedora approved license
[+] license field matches the actual license
[+] license file is included in %doc
[+] spec file is in American English
[+] spec file is legible
[+] sources match upstream: md5sum is 3704d215fb4343040eaff66a7a87c63a for both
[+] package builds on at least one primary arch (tried x86_64)
[N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch:
Question: is llvm available on all arches?
[+] all build requirements in BuildRequires
[N] spec file handles locales properly
[N] ldconfig in %post and %postun
[+] no bundled copies of system libraries
[N] no relocatable packages
[+] package owns all directories that it creates
[+] no files listed twice in %files
[+] proper permissions on files
[+] consistent use of macros
[+] code or permissible content
[N] large documentation in -doc
[+] no runtime dependencies in %doc
[N] header files in -devel
[N] static libraries in -static
[N] .so in -devel: this .so is a plugin, and is in exactly the right place
[N] -devel requires main package
[+] package contains no libtool archives
[N] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install
[+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages
[+] all filenames in UTF-8
SHOULD:
[N] query upstream for license text
[N] description and summary contains available translations
[+] package builds in mock: tried fedora-rawhide-i386
[+] package builds on all supported arches: tried i386 and x86_64
[-] package functions as described: could not test because I could not install;
see above
[+] sane scriptlets
[N] subpackages require the main package
[N] placement of pkgconfig files
[+] file dependencies versus package dependencies
[N] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 710904] Review Request: octave-communications - Communications for Octave
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710904 Bug 710904 depends on bug 710906, which changed state. Bug 710906 Summary: Review Request: octave-signal - Signal processing for Octave https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710906 What|Old Value |New Value Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA Resolution||ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED --- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola 2011-12-15 18:36:27 EST --- Ping Thomas?? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768183] Review Request: is-interface - library for the information system in wlcg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768183 adev changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://svnweb.cern.ch/trac ||/lcgutil/wiki CC||pin...@pingoured.fr 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 768183] New: Review Request: is-interface - library for the information system in wlcg
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: is-interface - library for the information system in wlcg https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768183 Summary: Review Request: is-interface - library for the information system in wlcg Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ade...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/8/is-interface.spec SRPM URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/7/is-interface-1.12.1-1_epel.src.rpm Description: is-interface is a client side library for the information system of wlcg ( CERN ) compatible GLUE 1.0 and GLUE 2.0 and designed for GFAL and FTS. rpmlint : is-interface.src: W: invalid-url Source0: is-interface-1.12.1.src.tar.gz 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. koji scratch : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3588043 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728815] Review Request: trademgen - C++ Simulated Travel Demand Generation 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=728815 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 728815] Review Request: trademgen - C++ Simulated Travel Demand Generation 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=728815 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 17:58:40 EST --- trademgen-0.2.2-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/trademgen-0.2.2-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 728815] Review Request: trademgen - C++ Simulated Travel Demand Generation 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=728815 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 17:59:21 EST --- trademgen-0.2.2-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/trademgen-0.2.2-1.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759712] Review Request: dragonegg - GCC plugin to use LLVM optimizers and code generators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759712
--- Comment #2 from Jerry James 2011-12-15 17:55:56 EST
---
I tried to build this on a rawhide machine, and got this:
...
+ make -j3
Compiling utils/TargetInfo.cpp
g++: error: directory": No such file or directory
make: *** [TargetInfo.o] Error 1
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.itjbTr (%build)
Building with "make VERBOSE=1" shows that the g++ invocation includes this:
-DREVISION=\"Unversioned directory\". The shell sees that as two words:
-DREVISION=\"Unversioned
directory\"
REVISION is set to that value by svnversion. So this package cannot be built
on a machine where svnversion is installed.
In mock, on the other hand, the build succeeds, since nothing pulls in
svnversion, but I see this in the logs:
make: svnversion: Command not found
It looks like REVISION is only used in one source file, src/Backend.cpp, and
that the code that uses it is only compiled if IDENT_ASM_OP is defined, and
that nothing defines IDENT_ASM_OP. So I did this in %prep:
sed -i "s/^REVISION:=.*/REVISION:=%{version}/" Makefile
What do you think?
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768174] Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768174 --- Comment #2 from adev 2011-12-15 17:58:09 EST --- Koji scratch build : http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3587730 rpmlint *.rpm srm-ifce.src: W: invalid-url Source0: srm-ifce-1.12.tar.gz 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768174] Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768174 adev changed: What|Removed |Added URL||https://svnweb.cern.ch/trac ||/lcgutil/wiki CC||ade...@gmail.com, ||pin...@pingoured.fr 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 768174] Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768174 --- Comment #1 from adev 2011-12-15 17:48:24 EST --- spec file and SRPMs uploaded on my personnal server -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768173] New: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768173 Summary: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ade...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/6/srm-ifce.spec SRPM URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/5/srm-ifce-1.12-1.src.rpm Description: SRM interface is an open source implementation of the SRM ( Storage Resources Manager, https://sdm.lbl.gov/srm-wg/doc/SRM.v2.2.html ) specification for the distributed storage management. This implementation is used at CERN in several client side tools for files management. ( https://svnweb.cern.ch/trac/lcgutil/wiki ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768174] New: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768174 Summary: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ade...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/6/srm-ifce.spec SRPM URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/5/srm-ifce-1.12-1.src.rpm Description: SRM interface is an open source implementation of the SRM ( Storage Resources Manager, https://sdm.lbl.gov/srm-wg/doc/SRM.v2.2.html ) specification for the distributed storage management. This implementation is used at CERN in several client side tools for files management. ( https://svnweb.cern.ch/trac/lcgutil/wiki ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768171] New: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768171 Summary: Review Request: srm-ifce - Storage Resources Manager client implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ade...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/6/srm-ifce.spec SRPM URL: https://firwen.org/redmine/attachments/download/5/srm-ifce-1.12-1.src.rpm Description: SRM interface is an open source implementation of the SRM ( Storage Resources Manager, https://sdm.lbl.gov/srm-wg/doc/SRM.v2.2.html ) specification for the distributed storage management. This implementation is used at CERN in several client side tools for files management. ( https://svnweb.cern.ch/trac/lcgutil/wiki ) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768100] Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768100 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2011-12-15 17:23:31 EST --- OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines OK - Spec file matches base package name. OK - Spec has consistant macro usage. OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines. OK - License (BSD) OK - License field in spec matches See below - License file included in package OK - Spec in American English OK - Spec is legible. OK - Sources match upstream md5sum: 8647f79046d53bc964961eb7687fa402 trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-20111215.git43a7537.tar.xz 8647f79046d53bc964961eb7687fa402 ../trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-20111215.git43a7537.tar.xz OK - BuildRequires correct OK - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good. OK - Package has a correct %clean section. OK - Package has correct buildroot OK - Package is code or permissible content. OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. OK - Package has rm -rf RPM_BUILD_ROOT at top of %install OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files. OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. OK - Package owns all the directories it creates. OK - Package obey's FHS standard (except for 2 exceptions) See below - No rpmlint output. OK - final provides and requires are sane. SHOULD Items: OK - Should build in mock. OK - Should build on all supported archs OK - Should function as described. OK - Should have dist tag OK - Should package latest version OK - Should not use file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin Issues: 1. It might be nice for upstream to include a copy of the license, and/or at least mention it in the files a bit more than a small note/mention in setup.py. Not a blocker I suppose, but might be good to ask upstream to add a note to the readme at least. :) 2. rpmlint says: trac-mastertickets-plugin.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US viewable -> view able, view-able, viable trac-mastertickets-plugin.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depgraph -> epigraph trac-mastertickets-plugin.noarch: W: no-documentation trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US graphviz -> graph viz, graph-viz, graphic trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US viewable -> view able, view-able, viable trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US depgraph -> epigraph trac-mastertickets-plugin.src: W: invalid-url Source0: trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-20111215.git43a7537.tar.xz 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. All can be ignored. I see no blockers, so this package is APPROVED. Happy to help co-maintain if you like. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 706299] Review Request: python3-cvxopt - A Python Package for Convex Optimization
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=706299 Till Maas changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||opensou...@till.name AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|opensou...@till.name 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 683610] Review Request: hxtools - A collection of several 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=683610 --- Comment #13 from Till Maas 2011-12-15 17:14:18 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) > Till, I plan to beg for review swaps on fedora-devel-list again soon. Do you > want to reserve one of the packages in comment 6 for yourself before I do so? Thank you for asking, I take the python package then. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768100] Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768100 --- Comment #2 from Pierre-YvesChibon 2011-12-15 17:02:38 EST --- Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/trac-mastertickets-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-2.20111215.git43a7537.el6.src.rpm Added python-setuptools as BR -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 766916] Review Request: grinder - tool for synchronizing yum repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=766916
--- Comment #1 from Jeff Ortel 2011-12-15 16:49:27 EST ---
Hey John,
Looks pretty good.
Few minor things so far:
* Replace: %define with: %global per packaging guidelines 1.32.
* The %description: A tool for syncing content from the Red Hat Network. Does
not seem to accurately and completely describe the package.
* Source0:
https://fedorahosted.org/releases/g/r/%{name}/%{name}-%{version}.tar.gz looking
for: grinder-0.132.tar.gz in: https://fedorahosted.org/releases/g/r/grinder
does not match: grinder-0.0.132.tar.gz found instead.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768100] Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768100 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768100] Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768100 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768100] Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768100 Kevin Fenzi 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 768100] Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768100 --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi 2011-12-15 16:03:58 EST --- I will review this package -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 598315] Review Request: UrJTAG - A tool to flash/program/debug hardware via JTAG adapters
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598315 --- Comment #10 from Scott Tsai 2011-12-15 15:53:08 EST --- Successful Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3587585 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 747092] Review Request: lzma-sdk457 - 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=747092 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 15:41:47 EST --- lzma-sdk457-4.57-1.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lzma-sdk457-4.57-1.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 747092] Review Request: lzma-sdk457 - 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=747092 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 15:41:56 EST --- lzma-sdk457-4.57-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/lzma-sdk457-4.57-1.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 747092] Review Request: lzma-sdk457 - 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=747092 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 767583] Review Request: python-poppler-qt4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767583 --- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones 2011-12-15 15:32:55 EST --- Doesn't seem to be explicitly supported by upstream, although testing python 3.x is on upstream's TODO list. If you make a case for it and upstream agrees I will modify the 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 747080] Review Request: smb4k - The SMB/CIFS Share Browser for KDE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=747080 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NOTABUG Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR), |201449(FE-DEADREVIEW) |656997(kde-reviews) | Alias|smb4k | Flag|needinfo?(juankprada@gmail. | |com)| Last Closed||2011-12-15 15:14:31 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 15:14:31 EST --- :( Looks like a dead review then. Feel free to re-open when/if you're still interested in pursuing this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757856] Review Request: kdf - View disk usage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757856 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-12-15 15:00:50 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 15:00:50 EST --- imported -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757851] Review Request: ark - Archive manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757851 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-12-15 14:58:43 --- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 14:58:43 EST --- imported -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757855] Review Request: kcharselect - Character selector
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757855 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2011-12-15 14:59:35 --- Comment #4 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 14:59:35 EST --- imported. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722713] Review Request: ace - Optimal route search in a complete graph
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722713 --- Comment #13 from Kevin Kofler 2011-12-15 14:00:12 EST --- In case Volker or anybody else wonders: The paper is about solving the traveling salesman problem by a heuristic which simulates space-time curvature. (Thankfully, since I speak Italian and French fluently, I can make sense of Spanish.) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767583] Review Request: python-poppler-qt4
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767583 Jochen Schmitt changed: What|Removed |Added CC||joc...@herr-schmitt.de --- Comment #1 from Jochen Schmitt 2011-12-15 14:05:23 EST --- I want to ask, if you can provide a pytohon-3 compilant release of this package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722713] Review Request: ace - Optimal route search in a complete graph
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722713 --- Comment #12 from Kevin Kofler 2011-12-15 13:53:13 EST --- In any case, both the package and the executable need to get some longer, less ambiguous name than "ace" (see comment #9). (If you can't think of anything more suitable, you can call them algoritmo-curvatura-espacial, which is both a valid RPM name and a valid executable name 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 608852] Review Request: epris - a dbus service to listen to music
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608852 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #28 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 13:47:03 EST --- Ok, thanks. APPROVED. In the future, wait for approval before making SCM 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 608852] Review Request: epris - a dbus service to listen to music
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608852 --- Comment #29 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 13:48:00 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768100] New: Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768100 Summary: Review Request: trac-mastertickets-plugin - Add support for ticket dependencies to Trac Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pin...@pingoured.fr QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/trac-mastertickets-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://pingou.fedorapeople.org/RPMs/trac-mastertickets-plugin-3.0.2-1.20111215.git43a7537.el6.src.rpm Description: This plugin adds "blocks" and "blocked by" fields to each ticket, enabling you to express dependencies between tickets. It also provides a graphviz-based dependency-graph feature for those tickets having dependencies specified, allowing you to visually understand the dependency tree. The dependency graph is viewable by clicking 'depgraph' in the context (in the upper right corner) menu when viewing a ticket that blocks or is blocked by another ticket. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608852] Review Request: epris - a dbus service to listen to music
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608852 --- Comment #27 from Ratnadeep Debnath 2011-12-15 13:30:59 EST --- Hi Jon, >A: I didn't approve it yet. Are you sponsored? Yes. I already maintain two packages at Fedora: python-keyring and wordgroupz. I am also approved in the Fedora Packager GIT Commit Group. >B: You didn't set the fedora-cvs flag. setting that now. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 608852] Review Request: epris - a dbus service to listen to music
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=608852 Ratnadeep Debnath changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767622] Review Request: unixODBC-gui-qt - Qt tools for unixODBC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767622 --- Comment #7 from Honza Horak 2011-12-15 12:51:36 EST --- I've asked upstream to specify the license version and correct FSF address. The other issues seem to be clear, I'll attach a fixed srpm and spec as soon as I have an answer from upstream. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 739263] Review Request: sugar-bounce - Fast paced 3D action game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=739263
--- Comment #5 from Brendan Jones 2011-12-15
12:44:26 EST ---
I would think that you can simply leave the BuildArch out and make sure that
the arch specific stuff goes in the correct %{_libdir}/sugar/activities rather
than %{sugaractivitydir}.
%{_libdir} will change to lib/lib64 depending on the arch the rpm is building.
You can test it out in mock:
mock -r fedora-16-i386
mock -r fedora-16-x86_64
I'm new to Sugar so I would suggest contacting one of the other Sugar
maintainers on how to package arch specific Sugar Activities.
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Sugar_Activities)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 751172] Review Request: cumin - management console for Red Hat MRG 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=751172
--- Comment #7 from Trevor McKay 2011-12-15 12:20:07 EST ---
Spec URL: http://tmckay.fedorapeople.org/cumin.spec
SRPM URL: http://tmckay.fedorapeople.org/cumin-0.1.5137-2.fc16.src.rpm
Updated.
Added empty build section,
fixed mixed tabs and spaces,
added %doc for %{cumin_doc}/*,
removed default enable of service in %post
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 754754] Review Request: perl-Gtk3 - Perl interface to the 3.x series of the gtk+ toolkit
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754754 --- Comment #4 from Daniel Berrange 2011-12-15 12:19:17 EST --- Updated to 0.002 which also fixes the RT ticket mentioned above http://berrange.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Gtk3/perl-Gtk3.spec http://berrange.fedorapeople.org/review/perl-Gtk3/perl-Gtk3-0.002-1.fc17.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 738079] Review Request: quartz - Enterprise Job Scheduler for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738079 --- Comment #15 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-12-15 11:53:25 EST --- Aha, ok then. I will finish this review tomorrow. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 755093] Review Request: mactel-boot - boot tools for Intel Apple hardware
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755093 --- Comment #31 from Matthew Garrett 2011-12-15 11:52:30 EST --- Unfortunate skew between the source I was testing with and the source I uploaded. Sorry about that. The previous approach was pretty much guaranteed to fail due to unmounting the filesystem resulting in the kernel writing back the original superblock. It's necessary to perform the modification without the filesystem being mounted. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 738079] Review Request: quartz - Enterprise Job Scheduler for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738079 --- Comment #14 from Andy Grimm 2011-12-15 11:49:16 EST --- They are not the same: $ diff -urN quartz-2.1.1 quartz-2.1.2 | diffstat examples/pom.xml |2 pom.xml |2 quartz-all/pom.xml|2 quartz-backward-compat/pom.xml|2 quartz-commonj/pom.xml|2 quartz-jboss/pom.xml |2 quartz-oracle/pom.xml |2 quartz-weblogic/pom.xml |2 quartz/pom.xml|2 quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/CalendarIntervalScheduleBuilder.java |6 - quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/CronScheduleBuilder.java | 40 ++- quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/DailyTimeIntervalScheduleBuilder.java | 39 ++ quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/JobBuilder.java |7 + quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/SimpleScheduleBuilder.java|2 quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/TimeOfDay.java| 57 +- quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/TriggerBuilder.java |7 + quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/core/QuartzSchedulerThread.java |3 quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/impl/StdSchedulerFactory.java |2 quartz/src/main/java/org/quartz/package.html | 28 quartz/src/test/java/org/quartz/CronScheduleBuilderTest.java | 47 20 files changed, 230 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) and thus I would prefer to use the latest version tagged in SVN. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 738079] Review Request: quartz - Enterprise Job Scheduler for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738079 --- Comment #13 from Andy Grimm 2011-12-15 11:47:12 EST --- I can diff them, but notice that the latest tag in SVN is 2.1.2, while the latest tarball is 2.1.1. This is why I used SVN instead. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 755093] Review Request: mactel-boot - boot tools for Intel Apple hardware
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=755093
--- Comment #30 from Mads Kiilerich 2011-12-15 11:45:03
EST ---
The rpm can't be installed - the script and hfs-bless fails. It can be fixed
with:
- if (argc != 3) {
+ if (argc != 4) {
fprintf(stderr, "usage: %s filesystem directory filename\n", argv[0]);
That proves that hfs-bless and the rpm haven't been tested in a real system at
all and doesn't leave much confidence in the stability of this approach.
I didn't see any indications that this version works better than the previous
versions, but the testing wasn't conclusive because I was interrupted by Bug
768061 after having used the boot device chooser in OS/X.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 749812] Review Request: sugar-fractionbounce - A game which teaches fractions and estimations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=749812 --- Comment #3 from Kalpa Welivitigoda 2011-12-15 11:42:56 EST --- Thanks. I'm not a sponsor yet. So I won't be able to review your package review requests at the moment. Still I will try to review them informally as time permits. The group is not a standard, still it is valid. Here are the new files. Spec URL: http://callkalpa.fedorapeople.org/sugar-fractionbounce/sugar-fractionbounce.spec SRPM URL: http://callkalpa.fedorapeople.org/sugar-fractionbounce/sugar-fractionbounce-13-1.fc16.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 749812] Review Request: sugar-fractionbounce - A game which teaches fractions and estimations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=749812 Kalpa Welivitigoda changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |sugar-fraction-bounce - A |sugar-fractionbounce - A |game which teaches |game which teaches |fractions and estimations |fractions and estimations -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 766916] Review Request: grinder - tool for synchronizing yum repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=766916 Jeff Ortel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jor...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jor...@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 738079] Review Request: quartz - Enterprise Job Scheduler for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738079
--- Comment #12 from Miroslav Suchý 2011-12-15 11:37:40 EST
---
It builds successfully:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3587138
I briefly check it, and it all seems ok, but one thing. You have in spec:
# svn export http://svn.terracotta.org/svn/quartz/tags/quartz-2.1.2
# tar caf quartz-2.1.2.tar.xz quartz-2.1.2
Source0:%{name}-%{version}.tar.xz
But I find this page:
http://terracotta.org/downloads/open-source/destination?name=quartz-2.1.1.tar.gz&bucket=tcdistributions&file=quartz-2.1.1.tar.gz
with this download link:
http://d2zwv9pap9ylyd.cloudfront.net/quartz-2.1.1.tar.gz
If you will use this as Source0, we can even check if md5sum is the same as
upstream.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 683610] Review Request: hxtools - A collection of several 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=683610 --- Comment #12 from Jerry James 2011-12-15 11:32:51 EST --- Till, I plan to beg for review swaps on fedora-devel-list again soon. Do you want to reserve one of the packages in comment 6 for yourself before I do so? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 751792] Review Request: felix-gogo-runtime - Community OSGi R4 Service Platform Implementation - Basic Commands
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751792
Andrew Robinson changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Andrew Robinson 2011-12-15 10:51:25
EST ---
Package Review
(http://tradej.fedorapeople.org/felix-gogo-runtime/0.10.0/2/felix-gogo-runtime-0.10.0-2.fc15.src.rpm)
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[X] Rpmlint output:
felix-gogo-runtime.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US modularity ->
molecularity
The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
[X] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[X] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[X] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[X] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[X] Buildroot definition is not present
[X] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[X] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 2.0
[X] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[X] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[X] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[X] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package:dcf4657b20dde0883ad30cff1ced19de
MD5SUM upstream package:dcf4657b20dde0883ad30cff1ced19de
[X] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[X] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[X] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[X] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[X] Permissions on files are set properly.
[X] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[X] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[X] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[-] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[X] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[X] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[X] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[X] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[X] Package uses %global not %define
[-] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[X] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[X] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[X] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[X] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[X] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses "-Dmaven.test.skip=true" explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap "-Dmaven.local.depmap.file=*" explain why
it's needed in a comment
[X] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[X] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[X] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[X] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[X] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[X] Latest version is packaged.
[X] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: x86_64
*** APPROVED ***
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main
[5] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2
[6] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Filenames
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You
[Bug 751344] Review Request: sesame - Red Hat MRG management system agent
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751344 --- Comment #8 from Trevor McKay 2011-12-15 10:38:50 EST --- Spec URL: http://tmckay.fedorapeople.org/sesame.spec SRPM URL: http://tmckay.fedorapeople.org/sesame-1.1-2.fc16.src.rpm Tweaked the spec, do not enable the service by default in %post -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767622] Review Request: unixODBC-gui-qt - Qt tools for unixODBC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767622 --- Comment #6 from Tom Lane 2011-12-15 10:24:16 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) Review comments seem mostly sound, except this: > - shouldn't a devel subpackage exist? if not then the *.so links shouldn't be > packaged at all The reason for the *.so symlinks is that these libraries are meant to be dlopen'ed at runtime by unixODBC, and people are not in the habit of including soname version numbers in the config files that specify what to use. So it is correct that there are *.so links in the base package. They are not meant for devel purposes. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 722713] Review Request: ace - Optimal route search in a complete graph
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722713 --- Comment #11 from Mauricio Cleveland 2011-12-15 10:04:03 EST --- Yes, i am working in the theorical paper for presentation in a congress. After this i continue the RPM implementation. The paper is in spanish here: http://www.universodigital.cl/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/curvatura1.pdf -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 766083] Fedora 17 feature Derelict
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=766083 --- Comment #5 from Matthieu Saulnier 2011-12-15 09:08:34 EST --- Hello, * some mispelling in french description : %description -l fr derelict soutient quelques dispositifs utiles pour le développement de projet incluant : - Uniformité du code portable sur plusieurs plates-formes Derelict charge les bibliothèques partagées manuellement au temps d'exécution et renvoie une exception quand une bibliothèque, ou n'importe quel symbole dans la bibliothèque, ne charge pas. Ceci vous donne le contrôle complet sur la façon de traiter le cas où une bibliothèque partagée ne chargerait pas. Vous pouvez retomber à un chemin différent de code, donner à vos utilisateurs un message d'erreur utile ou prendre n'importe quelle mesure que vous voulez. Sans avoir à vous soucier d'un comportement identique à travers de multiples plates-formes. - Chargement sélectif de symbole - ce dispositif vous permet de surcharger des exceptions renvoyées par derelict quand un symbole de bibliothèque partagée ne charge pas. C'est un but du projet que le paquet derelict soit mis à jour afin de charger la dernière version de chaque bibliothèque. Souvent, les nouvelles versions de bibliothèque incluent de nouvelles fonctions. Si un utilisateur a une version plus ancienne de la bibliothèque installée, ou une à laquelle il manque les nouveaux symboles d'une fonction, derelict le notera et renverra une exception. En se servant du chargement sélectif des symboles, vous pouvez dépasser ce comportement et permettre à la version la plus ancienne de derelict de se charger avec succès. * As you don't plan to build for EPEL < 6, BuildRoot Tag is useless and you can remove it. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag * There is an error in allegro-static's requirements : line 95: Requires: allegro5-addon-dialog, allegro5-addon-dialog-develRequires: * Why do you call explicitly DerelictFT_ALL *and* DerelictFT in make section ? line 315: DerelictFT_ALL \ line 316: DerelictFT \ * As you have removed devhelp package you can remove your python script : line 15: Source1:DdocToDevhelp * In %doc section, you can add a joker like this : line 342 %doc doc/* * There is an error in changelog version entry : line 392 [...skip...] 2-14.20061svn593 It should be 2-14.2006svn593 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767185] Review Request: pygtkhelpers - assists the building of PyGTK applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767185 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 09:03:19 EST --- PIDA does in fact work with this. Added flatland review and dep. I propose simply not shipping debug, do you think that would work? Other requires fixed. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 768007] New: Review Request: python-flatland - HTML form management and validation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-flatland - HTML form management and validation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768007 Summary: Review Request: python-flatland - HTML form management and validation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: limburg...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Description: Flatland maps between rich, structured Python application data and the string-oriented flat namespace of web forms, key/value stores, text files and user input. Flatland provides a schema-driven mapping toolkit with optional data validation. SRPM: http://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/python-flatland/python-flatland-0.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm SPEC: http://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/python-flatland/python-flatland.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 767185] Review Request: pygtkhelpers - assists the building of PyGTK applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767185 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||768007 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 08:57:14 EST --- Adding Flatland 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 768007] Review Request: python-flatland - HTML form management and validation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768007 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||767185 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767047] Review Request: ViTables - Viewer for Hierarical Datafiles (HDF5)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767047 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 08:53:50 EST --- ViTables-2.1-2.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ViTables-2.1-2.fc15 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767047] Review Request: ViTables - Viewer for Hierarical Datafiles (HDF5)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767047 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2011-12-15 08:53:57 EST --- ViTables-2.1-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/ViTables-2.1-2.fc16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767047] Review Request: ViTables - Viewer for Hierarical Datafiles (HDF5)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767047 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 767622] Review Request: unixODBC-gui-qt - Qt tools for unixODBC
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767622 --- Comment #5 from Dan Horák 2011-12-15 08:49:37 EST --- formal review is here, see the notes explaining OK* and BAD statuses below: OK* source files match upstream: compared with my own checkout OK package meets naming and versioning guidelines. BAD specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. OK dist tag is present. BAD license field matches the actual license. OK license is open source-compatible (GPL/LGPL). License text included in package. OK latest version is being packaged. OK BuildRequires are proper. OK compiler flags are appropriate. OK package builds in mock (Rawhide/x86_64). OK debuginfo package looks complete. BAD rpmlint is silent. OK* final provides and requires look sane. N/A %check is present and all tests pass. OK shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths, scriptlet present OK owns the directories it creates. OK doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. OK no duplicates in %files. OK file permissions are appropriate. OK correct scriptlets present. OK code, not content. OK documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. OK %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. OK no headers. OK no pkgconfig files. OK no libtool .la droppings. OK GUI apps with desktop files - the source archive is not compressed although it has .gz suffix, you can use fedora-getsvn tool for grabbing the sources - instead of using "cp" for installing files you should use either "cp -p" or (better) "install -p -m 644", so the timestamp is kept for the files - licenses as written in README and source files would be GPL+ and LGPL+ because no version is specified, included license texts are irrelevant here (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing/FAQ), clarification with upstream is required, ODBCTestQ4 seems to be GPLv2+, unixODBC library itself is LGPLv2+ - passing --disable-static to configure should let only the shared libs build, removing the need to "rm" them - shouldn't a devel subpackage exist? if not then the *.so links shouldn't be packaged at all - rpmlint complains a bit: unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging unixODBC-gui-qt.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging unixODBC-gui-qt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugins -> plug ins, plug-ins, plugging unixODBC-gui-qt.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US plugin -> plug in, plug-in, plugging => please fix unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libgtrtstQ4.so unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: devel-file-in-non-devel-package /usr/lib64/libodbcinstQ4.so => see point above unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ODBCTestQ4 unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ODBCCreateDataSourceQ4 unixODBC-gui-qt.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ODBCManageDataSourcesQ4 => would be nice, but not a blocker unixODBC-gui-qt.src: W: invalid-url Source0: unixODBC-gui-qt-20111208svn95.tar.gz => OK, snapshot is used unixODBC-gui-qt-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/unixODBC-gui-qt/ODBCTestQ4/* => should be reported/fixed upstream -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767047] Review Request: ViTables - Viewer for Hierarical Datafiles (HDF5)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767047 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 08:16:25 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757851] Review Request: ark - Archive manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757851 --- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 08:18:51 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 761474] Review Request: ibus-european-table - Predictive text for european languages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=761474 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 08:15:04 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). f17==devel, and email addresses!= FAS accounts. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767985] Review Request: man2html - Convert man pages to HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767985 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 759045] Review Request: ghc-base16-bytestring - ByteString hex encoding and decoding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759045 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 08:14:03 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767985] New: Review Request: man2html - Convert man pages to HTML
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: man2html - Convert man pages to HTML
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767985
Summary: Review Request: man2html - Convert man pages to HTML
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: unspecified
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org
ReportedBy: tchollingswo...@gmail.com
QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: nott...@redhat.com,
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
Classification: Fedora
Story Points: ---
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Spec URL: http://tchol.org/fedora/rpm2html.spec
SRPM URL: http://tchol.org/fedora/man2html-1.6-1.g.fc16.src.rpm
Koji scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3586845
Description: man2html is a man page to HTML converter.
% rpmlint SPECS/man2html.spec
# doesn't use GNU autoconf
SPECS/man2html.spec:116: W: configure-without-libdir-spec
# rpmlint doesn't recognize %{patches}
SPECS/man2html.spec: W: patch-not-applied Patch3: man2html-cgi.patch
SPECS/man2html.spec: W: patch-not-applied Patch1025: man2html-all-args.patch
#
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 21 warnings.
% rpmlint RPMS/x86_64/man2html*
man2html.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/hman.1.gz 7:
warning: macro `LO' not defined
# cache directory for CGI scripts
man2html.x86_64: E: non-standard-dir-perm /var/cache/man2html 0775L
man2html-core.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/man2html-core-1.6/COPYING
man2html-core.x86_64: W: manual-page-warning /usr/share/man/man1/man2html.1.gz
6: warning: macro `LO' not defined
man2html-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/src/debug/man-1.6g/debian/sources/manwhatis.c
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 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 757851] Review Request: ark - Archive manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757851 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 08:06:01 EST --- Thanks, I'll make sure to add %doc COPYING before issuing any builds New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ark Short Description: Archive manager Owners: than jreznik ltinkl rnovacek rdieter kkofler Branches: f16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 758958] Review Request: ghc-simple-sendfile - Cross-platform sendfile system call
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=758958 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 08:01:22 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 756386] Review Request: ghc-unordered-containers - Efficient hashing-based container types
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=756386 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 07:55:55 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757851] Review Request: ark - Archive manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757851 Radek Novacek changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Radek Novacek 2011-12-15 07:58:04 EST --- OK, thanks for explanation, I'm setting fedora-review+. I don't consider missing COPYING as 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 757855] Review Request: kcharselect - Character selector
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757855 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 07:58:34 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757856] Review Request: kdf - View disk usage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757856 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2011-12-15 07:59:38 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757855] Review Request: kcharselect - Character selector
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757855 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 07:52:50 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: kcharselect Short Description: Character selector Owners: than jreznik ltinkl rnovacek rdieter kkofler Branches: f16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757856] Review Request: kdf - View disk usage
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757856 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 07:53:35 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: kdf Short Description: View disk usage Owners: than jreznik ltinkl rnovacek rdieter kkofler Branches: f16 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757851] Review Request: ark - Archive manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757851 --- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter 2011-12-15 07:49:30 EST --- I think I disagree with your point about licensing. Taking BSD + GPLv2+ sources does indeed result in an aggregate binary license that is GPLv2+ (the license: tag in .spec files is intended to track the licensing of packaged binaries, not necessarily track every licence of the sources used). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 598315] Review Request: UrJTAG - A tool to flash/program/debug hardware via JTAG adapters
4: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/lattice/lc4128c-tqfp100/lc4128c-tqfp100 urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/xilinx/xc3s1000/xc3s1000 urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/altera/epm3064a/l44 urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/lattice/lc4064zc/STEPPINGS urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/ibm/PARTS urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/hitachi/sh7729/STEPPINGS urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/hitachi/hd64465/hd64465 urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/philips/xcr3128xl-vq100/xcr3128xl-vq100 urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/freescale/mpc5200/STEPPINGS urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/analog/bf537/STEPPINGS urjtag.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/share/urjtag/xilinx/xc3s1000/fg456 urjtag-python.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/urjtag.so urjtag.so()(64bit) urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/tap/usbconn_list.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/tap/cable/generic_usbconn.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/types.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/cable.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/chain.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/parport.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/bsdl.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/tap/usbconn/libftdi.c urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/error.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/cmd/cmd_stapl.c urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/tap/cable/cmd_xfer.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/usbconn.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/stapl/stapl.c urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/stapl.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/tap/cable/usbblaster.c urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/pod.h urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/src/tap/cable/ft2232.c urjtag-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/urjtag-20111215-git-e1a4227/urjtag/include/urjtag/log.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/error.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/bitops.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/pld.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/types.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/data_register.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/tap.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/chain.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/part.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/bfin.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/tap_state.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/bssignal.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/bsdl_mode.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/log.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/parse.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/bsbit.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/bus.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/tap_register.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/pod.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/urjtag.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/usbconn.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/fclock.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/urjtag/gettext.h urjtag-devel.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/includ
