[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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-01-24 02:58:06 EST --- urjtag-0.10-2.fc16.20111215gite1a4227 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784175] Review Request: SuperLU - Subroutines to solve sparse linear systems
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784175
Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jussi.leht...@iki.fi
--- Comment #3 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2012-01-24 02:56:24
EST ---
Don't build against reference BLAS. Use ATLAS instead, it's an order of
magnitude faster. To link against the ATLAS BLAS library use
-L%{_libdir}/atlas -lf77blas -latlas.
You also might want to use %{version} instead of 4.3 in the spec file, e.g.
in %setup.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772362] Review Request: sigil - Free, Open Source WYSIWYG ebook editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772362 --- Comment #11 from Hans de Goede hdego...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 03:07:52 EST --- I've all send all the patches for both Sigil and FlightCrew upstream and I just got a mail from upstreaming stating that they will integrate them over the next couple of days. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783456] Review Request: perl-URI-Find-Simple - Simple interface to URI::Find
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783456 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 03:25:18 EST --- Source file is original. Ok. URL and Source0 are alive Ok. Summary verified from lib/URI/Find/Simple.pm. Ok. License verified from lib/URI/Find/Simple.pm. Ok. Description verified from lib/URI/Find/Simple.pm. TODO: Add second paragraph that explains explicitly what this package do. No XS code, noarch BuildArch is Ok. TODO: Build-require `perl(lib)' for tests (t/find.t:3). All tests pass. Ok. $ rpmlint perl-URI-Find-Simple.spec ../SRPMS/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03-1.fc17.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03-1.fc17.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. rpmlint is Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03-1.fc17.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Jan 24 09:09 /usr/share/doc/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03 -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 325 Oct 25 2010 /usr/share/doc/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03/Changes -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2621 Jan 24 09:09 /usr/share/man/man3/URI::Find::Simple.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Jan 24 09:09 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/URI drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Jan 24 09:09 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/URI/Find -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2954 Oct 25 2010 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/URI/Find/Simple.pm File permissions and layout are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03-1.fc17.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Carp) 1 perl(Encode) 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.14.2) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(URI::Find) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1 Binary requires are Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03-1.fc17.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(URI::Find::Simple) = 1.03 1 perl-URI-Find-Simple = 1.03-1.fc17 Binary provides are Ok. $ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/noarch/perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03-1.fc17.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. Package builds in F17 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3728154). Ok. Otherwise package is in line with Fedora and Perl packaging guidelines. Please consider fixing all `TODO' items before building this package. Resolution: Package APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783151] Review Request: FlightCrew - EPUB validation 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=783151 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||772362 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784047] Review Request: perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig - Use a .pac or wpad.dat file to get proxy information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784047 Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ppi...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@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 772362] Review Request: sigil - Free, Open Source WYSIWYG ebook editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772362 Dan Horák d...@danny.cz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Depends on||783151 AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@danny.cz Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #12 from Dan Horák d...@danny.cz 2012-01-24 03:28:15 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) I've all send all the patches for both Sigil and FlightCrew upstream and I just got a mail from upstreaming stating that they will integrate them over the next couple of days. That's a great news and thanks for finishing the work I've started. I will take a look on the remaining reviews later this week. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783454] Review Request: perl-URI-Title - Get the titles of things on the web in a sensible way
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783454 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 03:26:17 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-URI-Title Short Description: Get the titles of things on the web in a sensible way Owners: psabata mmaslano ppisar Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771941] Review Request: bacula-docs - Bacula documentation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771941 Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-01-24 03:37:57 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 741626] Review Request: packmol - Packing optimization for molecular dynamics simulations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=741626 --- Comment #15 from Fabien Archambault marbolan...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 03:37:43 EST --- Hi, Is it possible to build it agains CentOs-6 for the epel repo? I tried on a C6 bix and it works: rpmbuild --rebuild packmol-1.1.2.023-1.fc16.src.rpm Installing packmol-1.1.2.023-1.fc16.src.rpm warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: user mockbuild does not exist - using root warning: group mockbuild does not exist - using root Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.PT5aQU + umask 022 + cd /root/rpmbuild/BUILD + LANG=C + export LANG + unset DISPLAY + cd /root/rpmbuild/BUILD + rm -rf packmol + /bin/tar -xf - + /usr/bin/gzip -dc /root/rpmbuild/SOURCES/packmol-1.1.2.023.tar.gz + STATUS=0 + '[' 0 -ne 0 ']' + cd packmol + /bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w . + cp -a /root/rpmbuild/SOURCES/packmol-CMakeLists.txt CMakeLists.txt + find . -name '*.o' -delete + exit 0 Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.0yG8KE + umask 022 + cd /root/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd packmol + LANG=C + export LANG + unset DISPLAY + export FC=gfortran + FC=gfortran + mkdir ser + cd ser + CFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic' + export CFLAGS + CXXFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic' + export CXXFLAGS + FFLAGS='-O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m64 -mtune=generic' + export FFLAGS + /usr/bin/cmake -DCMAKE_VERBOSE_MAKEFILE=ON -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/usr -DCMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR:PATH=/usr/lib64 -DINCLUDE_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=/usr/include -DLIB_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=/usr/lib64 -DSYSCONF_INSTALL_DIR:PATH=/etc -DSHARE_INSTALL_PREFIX:PATH=/usr/share -DLIB_SUFFIX=64 -DBUILD_SHARED_LIBS:BOOL=ON -DUSE_OPENMP=OFF .. -- The Fortran compiler identification is GNU -- Check for working Fortran compiler: /usr/bin/gfortran -- Check for working Fortran compiler: /usr/bin/gfortran -- works -- Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info -- Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info - done -- Checking whether /usr/bin/gfortran supports Fortran 90 -- Checking whether /usr/bin/gfortran supports Fortran 90 -- yes -- The C compiler identification is GNU -- The CXX compiler identification is GNU -- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/gcc -- Check for working C compiler: /usr/bin/gcc -- works -- Detecting C compiler ABI info -- Detecting C compiler ABI info - done -- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/c++ -- Check for working CXX compiler: /usr/bin/c++ -- works -- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info -- Detecting CXX compiler ABI info - done -- Configuring done -- Generating done CMake Warning: The variable, 'BUILD_SHARED_LIBS', specified manually, was not used during the generation. CMake Warning: The variable, 'CMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR', specified manually, was not used during the generation. CMake Warning: The variable, 'INCLUDE_INSTALL_DIR', specified manually, was not used during the generation. CMake Warning: The variable, 'LIB_INSTALL_DIR', specified manually, was not used during the generation. CMake Warning: The variable, 'LIB_SUFFIX', specified manually, was not used during the generation. CMake Warning: The variable, 'SHARE_INSTALL_PREFIX', specified manually, was not used during the generation. CMake Warning: The variable, 'SYSCONF_INSTALL_DIR', specified manually, was not used during the generation. -- Build files have been written to: /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser + make -j8 /usr/bin/cmake -H/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol -B/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser --check-build-system CMakeFiles/Makefile.cmake 0 /usr/bin/cmake -E cmake_progress_start /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser/CMakeFiles /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser/CMakeFiles/progress.marks make -f CMakeFiles/Makefile2 all make[1]: Entering directory `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser' make -f CMakeFiles/packmol.dir/build.make CMakeFiles/packmol.dir/depend make[2]: Entering directory `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser' cd /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser /usr/bin/cmake -E cmake_depends Unix Makefiles /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser /root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser/CMakeFiles/packmol.dir/DependInfo.cmake --color= Scanning dependencies of target packmol make[2]: Leaving directory `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser' make -f CMakeFiles/packmol.dir/build.make CMakeFiles/packmol.dir/requires make[2]: Entering directory `/root/rpmbuild/BUILD/packmol/ser' make[2]: Nothing to be done for `CMakeFiles/packmol.dir/requires'. make[2]: Leaving directory
[Bug 784201] New: Review Request: vim-nerdtree - A tree explorer plugin that owns your momma
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: vim-nerdtree - A tree explorer plugin that owns your momma https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784201 Summary: Review Request: vim-nerdtree - A tree explorer plugin that owns your momma Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: bkab...@redhat.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- SPEC: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/vim-nerdtree/vim-nerdtree.spec SRPM: http://bkabrda.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/vim-nerdtree/vim-nerdtree-4.2.0-1.fc16.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3728222 The NERD tree allows you to explore your filesystem and to open files and directories. It presents the filesystem to you in the form of a tree which you manipulate with the keyboard and/or mouse. It also allows you to perform simple filesystem operations. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783456] Review Request: perl-URI-Find-Simple - Simple interface to URI::Find
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783456 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 03:55:39 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-URI-Find-Simple Short Description: Simple interface to URI::Find Owners: psabata mmaslano ppisar Branches: InitialCC: perl-sig -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 741626] Review Request: packmol - Packing optimization for molecular dynamics simulations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=741626 Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.leht...@iki.fi 2012-01-24 03:59:27 EST --- Very well. Package Change Request == Package Name: packmol New Branches: el6 Owners: jussilehtola InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784047] Review Request: perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig - Use a .pac or wpad.dat file to get proxy information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784047 --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 04:15:28 EST --- Source file is original. Ok. URL and Source0 are alive. Ok. Summary verified from lib/HTTP/ProxyAutoConfig.pm. Ok. FIX: Change license to `GPLv2+ or Artistic' or clarify with upstream. lib/HTTP/ProxyAutoConfig.pm says: This module is free software; you may redistribute it and/or modify it under the same terms as Perl 5.10.1. For more details, see the full text of the licenses at http://www.perlfoundation.org/artistic_license_1_0 and http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html Description verified from lib/HTTP/ProxyAutoConfig.pm. Ok. All tests require network access witch is not available in Koji. Conditionally disabled by default Ok. $ rpmlint perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.spec ../SRPMS/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3-1.fc17.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pac - PAC, cap, pa perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) wpad - woad, wad, pad perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dat - DAT, tad, sat perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pac - PAC, cap, pa perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) pac - PAC, cap, pa perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) wpad - woad, wad, pad perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) dat - DAT, tad, sat perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pac - PAC, cap, pa 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. rpmlint is Ok. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Jan 24 09:57 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3 -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 1257 Mar 26 2010 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3/Changes -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 2382 Mar 14 2010 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3/README drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Jan 24 09:57 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3/examples -rwxr-xr-x1 rootroot 284 May 25 2001 /usr/share/doc/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3/examples/auto_proxy.pl -rw-r--r--1 rootroot 3440 Jan 24 09:57 /usr/share/man/man3/HTTP::ProxyAutoConfig.3pm.gz drwxr-xr-x2 rootroot0 Jan 24 09:57 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/HTTP -rw-r--r--1 rootroot23760 Mar 26 2010 /usr/share/perl5/vendor_perl/HTTP/ProxyAutoConfig.pm File layout and permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(Carp) 1 perl(IO::Socket) 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.14.2) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(Sys::Hostname) 1 perl(warnings) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) = 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) = 5.2-1 Binary requires are Ok. Documentation does not push new dependencies. Ok. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm | sort | uniq -c 1 perl(HTTP::ProxyAutoConfig) = 0.3 1 perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig = 0.3-1.fc17 Binary provides are Ok. $ resolvedeps rawhide ../RPMS/noarch/perl-HTTP-ProxyAutoConfig-0.3-1.fc17.noarch.rpm Binary dependencies resolvable. Ok. Package builds in F17 (http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3728249). ??? Otherwise package is in line with Fedora and Perl packaging guidelines. Please correct all `FIX' prefixed issues and provide new spec file. Resolution: Package NOT approved. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 693126] Review Request: openvas-administrator - Administrator Module for the Open Vulnerability Assessment System (OpenVAS)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=693126 --- Comment #3 from Michal Ambroz re...@seznam.cz 2012-01-24 04:17:10 EST --- Hi Siem, thank you for your remarks. Sorry for delay. The core openvas-libraries, openvas-scanner, openvas-manager finally got to some usable state so I can follow-up on the rest of the packages. SPEC: http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/openvas-administrator.spec SRPM: http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/openvas-administrator-1.1.2-1.fc16.src.rpm (In reply to comment #2) - rpmbuild failed: extend the Buildrequires with gcc and xmltoman Added buildrequires on xmltoman. Dependency to gcc is not needed. Here are logs from koji scratch build for F17 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3728246 - you do not need a %clean script: I actually plan this package for EPEL as well and clean is needed there. - systemd is required for init-scripts for Fedora 15+: Yes you are right. I have got reason for that - rest of the suite (openvas-scanner, openvas-manager) is still using systemv. As I target for EPEL I would preffer to finish the whole suite first with systemV style init scripts to have it prepared and tested for EPEL. Then I would like to move all to systemd. - sqlite-devel is not required for building removed. It was copy paste from other openvas package. - why do you require file /usr/bin/xsltproc and not the rpm libxslt it is contained in? The rpmlint complained with error about the explicit dependency on libxslt while it is gracefull about having explicit dependency on file. From this I believed it is preferred way. I have changed it to require libxslt. Best regards Michal Ambroz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] Review Request Derelict - Collection of wrapper for game programming in D
Please do not reply directly 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 MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on|759059 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759059] Review Request: SFML - Simple and Fast Multimedia 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=759059 MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|766083 | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] Review Request Derelict - Collection of wrapper for game programming in D
Please do not reply directly 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 MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 692733] Review Request: openvas-cli - Command-line tool to drive OpenVAS 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=692733 --- Comment #4 from Michal Ambroz re...@seznam.cz 2012-01-24 05:09:07 EST --- SPEC: http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/openvas-cli.spec SRPM: http://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/openvas-cli-1.1.4-1.fc16.src.rpm Updated to latest version. The core packages (openvas-libraries, openvas-scanner, openvas-manager) should be functional in Fedora 16 again so you should be able to try. Best regards Michal Ambroz -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #23 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 05:59:23 EST --- MIsformed request, please re-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 783454] Review Request: perl-URI-Title - Get the titles of things on the web in a sensible way
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783454 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 06:03:59 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 741626] Review Request: packmol - Packing optimization for molecular dynamics simulations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=741626 --- Comment #17 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 06:02:14 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 783456] Review Request: perl-URI-Find-Simple - Simple interface to URI::Find
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783456 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 06:04:36 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 766083] Review Request Derelict - Collection of wrapper for game programming in D
Please do not reply directly 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 #13 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 06:03:22 EST --- Please include an SCM request: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_requests Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783456] Review Request: perl-URI-Find-Simple - Simple interface to URI::Find
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783456 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-URI-Find-Simple-1.03-1 ||.fc17 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-01-24 06:34:04 --- Comment #4 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 06:34:04 EST --- Thank you, guys. Both TODOs have been fixed in the imported 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 784239] New: Review Request: python-django-debug-toolbar - Configurable set of panels that display various debug information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: python-django-debug-toolbar - Configurable set of panels that display various debug information https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784239 Summary: Review Request: python-django-debug-toolbar - Configurable set of panels that display various debug information Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mru...@matthias-runge.de 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://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-debug-toolbar.spec SRPM URL: http://www.matthias-runge.de/fedora/python-django-debug-toolbar-0.9.3-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: The Django Debug Toolbar is a configurable set of panels that display various debug information about the current request/response and when clicked, display more details about the panel's content. Currently, the following panels have been written and are working: - Django version - Request timer - A list of settings in settings.py - Common HTTP headers - GET/POST/cookie/session variable display - Templates and context used, and their template paths - SQL queries including time to execute and links to EXPLAIN each query - List of signals, their args and receivers - Logging output via Python's built-in logging, or via the logbook module koji scratchbuild: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3728505 I am aware of some spellig warnings as well of hidden-file-or-dir warnings. This doesn't affect package function. check-section not functional: https://github.com/django-debug-toolbar/django-debug-toolbar/issues/256 This is a nice-to-have, but not really required for building. I'm planning to activate checks, once upstream fixed the issue. According to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736776 this package should be named python-django-debug-toolbar instead of django-debug-toolbar -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782456] Review Request: kredentials - kde kerberos ticket system tray monitor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782456 --- Comment #2 from Neil Horman nhor...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 06:40:57 EST --- copy that, thanks james. I'll fix this up today. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783454] Review Request: perl-URI-Title - Get the titles of things on the web in a sensible way
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783454 Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-URI-Title-1.85-1.fc17 Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-01-24 07:00:16 --- Comment #4 from Petr Šabata psab...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 07:00:16 EST --- Thank you, guys. TODOs fixed in the first build. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 773043] Review Request: glassfish-jaxb-api - JAXB API bundle for GlassFish V3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=773043 --- Comment #6 from gil punto...@libero.it 2012-01-24 07:28:11 EST --- hi Spec URL: http://www.mediafire.com/file/508k9sycz7spqkl/glassfish-jaxb-api.spec SRPM URL: http://www.mediafire.com/file/evisgk7g6dbx4zt/glassfish-jaxb-api-2.2.3-1.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 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 Scott Tsai scottt...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #24 from Scott Tsai scottt...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 07:48:25 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: urjtag New Branches: el6 Owners: scottt chitlesh -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 773043] Review Request: glassfish-jaxb-api - JAXB API bundle for GlassFish V3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=773043
--- Comment #7 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2012-01-24
08:01:43 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
glassfish-jaxb-api.noarch: W: invalid-license CDDLv1.1
The value of the License tag was not recognized. Known values are: AAL,
Abstyles, Adobe, ADSL, AFL, AGPLv1, AGPLv3, AGPLv3 with
exceptions, AMDPLPA, AML, AMPAS BSD, APSL 2.0, APSL 2.0+, ARL,
Artistic 2.0, Artistic clarified, ASL 1.0, ASL 1.0+, ASL 1.1, ASL
1.1+, ASL 2.0, ASL 2.0+, Barr, Beerware, BeOpen, BitTorrent,
Boost, Borceux, BSD, BSD Protection, BSD with advertising, BSD with
attribution, CATOSL, CC0, CeCILL, CeCILL-B, CeCILL-C, CDDL,
CNRI, Condor, Copyright only, CPAL, CPL, Crossword, Crystal
Stacker, DOC, Dotseqn, DSDP, dvipdfm, ECL 1.0, ECL 2.0, eCos,
EFL 2.0, EFL 2.0+, eGenix, Entessa, EPL, ERPL, EU Datagrid,
EUPL 1.1, Eurosym, Fair, FTL, Giftware, GL2PS, Glide, Glulxe,
gnuplot, GPL+, GPL+ or Artistic, GPL+ with exceptions, GPLv1, GPLv2
or Artistic, GPLv2+ or Artistic, GPLv2, GPLv2 with exceptions,
GPLv2+, GPLv2+ with exceptions, GPLv3, GPLv3 with exceptions,
GPLv3+, GPLv3+ with exceptions, IBM, IJG, ImageMagick, iMatix,
Imlib2, Intel ACPI, Interbase, ISC, Jabber, JasPer, JPython,
Knuth, Latex2e, LBNL BSD, LGPLv2, LGPLv2 with exceptions, LGPLv2+,
LGPLv2+ or Artistic, LGPLv2+ with exceptions, LGPLv3, LGPLv3 with
exceptions, LGPLv3+, LGPLv3+ with exceptions, Lhcyr, libtiff,
LLGPL, Logica, LPL, LPPL, mecab-ipadic, MirOS, MIT, MIT with
advertising, mod_macro, Motosoto, MPLv1.0, MPLv1.0+, MPLv1.1,
MPLv1.1+, MS-PL, MS-RL, Naumen, NCSA, NetCDF, Netscape,
Newmat, Newsletr, NGPL, Nokia, NOSL, Noweb, OML, OpenLDAP,
OpenPBS, OpenSSL, OReilly, OSL 1.0, OSL 1.0+, OSL 1.1, OSL 1.1+,
OSL 2.0, OSL 2.0+, OSL 2.1, OSL 2.1+, OSL 3.0, OSL 3.0+, Phorum,
PHP, PlainTeX, Plexus, PostgreSQL, psutils, Public Domain,
Python, Qhull, QPL, Rdisc, RiceBSD, Romio, RPSL, Rsfs, Ruby,
Saxpath, SCEA, SCRIP, Sendmail, Sleepycat, SISSL, SLIB, SNIA,
SPL, TCL, Teeworlds, Threeparttable, TMate, TORQUEv1.1, TOSL,
TPL, UCD, Vim, VNLSL, VOSTROM, VSL, W3C, Webmin, Wsuipa,
WTFPL, wxWidgets, Xerox, xinetd, XSkat, YPLv1.1, Zed, Zend,
zlib, zlib with acknowledgement, ZPLv1.0, ZPLv1.0+, ZPLv2.0,
ZPLv2.0+, ZPLv2.1, ZPLv2.1+, CDL, FBSDDL, GFDL, IEEE, LDPL,
OFSFDL, Open Publication, Public Use, CC-BY, CC-BY-ND, CC-BY-SA,
DMTF, DSL, EFML, Free Art, GeoGratis, Green OpenMusic, OAL,
AMS, Arphic, Baekmuk, Bitstream Vera, DoubleStroke, Hershey,
IPA, Liberation, Lucida, MgOpen, mplus, OFL, PTFL, STIX,
Utopia, Wadalab, XANO, Redistributable, no modification permitted,
Freely redistributable without restriction.
Correct value for License tag is CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions
glassfish-jaxb-api.noarch: W: no-documentation
The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include
documentation files.
That's fine.
[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:CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions
Just needs to use the proper syntax for Fedora
[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:
MD5SUM upstream package:
[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.
[x] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
[Bug 773043] Review Request: glassfish-jaxb-api - JAXB API bundle for GlassFish V3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=773043 --- Comment #8 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it 2012-01-24 08:12:34 EST --- hi done Spec URL: http://www.mediafire.com/file/3fw10r4h4s8el76/glassfish-jaxb-api.spec SRPM URL: http://www.mediafire.com/file/kwwd9zzxcog76mc/glassfish-jaxb-api-2.2.3-1.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 728504] Review Request: jboss-sasl - SASL Provider for J2SE
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728504 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Blocks|652183(FE-JAVASIG) | Resolution||RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-01-24 08:24:29 --- Comment #12 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 08:24:29 EST --- Thanks for git, closing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782250] Review Request: xml-maven-plugin - Maven XML plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782250 Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 08:52:23 EST --- I'll do this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 #25 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 08:57:20 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 741945] Review Request: python-isodate - An ISO 8601 date/time/duration parser and formater
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=741945 James Laska jla...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from James Laska jla...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 09:12:38 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: python-isodate New Branches: el6 f15 Owners: jlaska -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 741945] Review Request: python-isodate - An ISO 8601 date/time/duration parser and formater
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=741945 --- Comment #12 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 09:16:08 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 781624] Review Request: opa - Opa, AGPL language for web 2.0
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781624 --- Comment #2 from package.maintai...@opalang.org 2012-01-24 09:21:53 EST --- Hi, thank you for trying. My apologies, there was problems with the previous hosting service so I used our own servers to host the files this time: Spec URL: http://download.opalang.org/fedora-package-candidate/opa.spec Source: http://download.opalang.org/fedora-package-candidate/opalang.tar.gz SRPM URL: http://download.opalang.org/fedora-package-candidate/opa-0.9.0-1.fc17.src.rpm RPM URL: http://download.opalang.org/fedora-package-candidate/opa-0.9.0-1.fc17.x86_64.rpm The binary package is working fine on x86_64 and I did not test on x86. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 576591] Review Request: iptraf-ng
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=576591 --- Comment #33 from Nikola Pajkovsky npajk...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 09:34:47 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: iptraf-ng Short Description: A console-based network monitoring utility Owners: npajkovs Branches: el5 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 741626] Review Request: packmol - Packing optimization for molecular dynamics simulations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=741626 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-01-24 09:48:56 EST --- packmol-1.1.2.023-1.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/packmol-1.1.2.023-1.el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782250] Review Request: xml-maven-plugin - Maven XML plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782250
--- Comment #2 from Alexander Kurtakov akurt...@redhat.com 2012-01-24
10:09:15 EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Unless packager wants to package for EPEL5 this is fine
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean would be needed if support for EPEL is required
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: Note: defattr macros not found. They would be needed for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf would be needed if support for EPEL5 is required
[x]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generates any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[x]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint xml-maven-plugin-javadoc-1.0-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
xml-maven-plugin-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -
Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
false positive.
rpmlint xml-maven-plugin-1.0-1.fc17.src.rpm
xml-maven-plugin.src: E: description-line-too-long C A plugin for various XML
related tasks like validation, transformation, and the like.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
Please fix.
rpmlint xml-maven-plugin-1.0-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
xml-maven-plugin.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C A plugin for various
XML related tasks like validation, transformation, and the like.
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
[!]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/akurtakov/tmp/782250/xml-maven-plugin-1.0-source-release.zip :
MD5SUM this package : 9c1ebea50fb8076421864b062a34bf21
MD5SUM upstream package : 9c1ebea50fb8076421864b062a34bf21
xml-maven-plugin-1.0-depmap :
MD5SUM this package : cb6cdd0a8d8e177a7caccf5982657559
MD5SUM upstream package : upstream source not found
The depmap is not used in the build please remove it.
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[-]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[x]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD Scriptlets must be sane, if used.
[x]:
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #14 from Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 10:18:35 EST --- Most of the issues were addressed, however there are a couple of worth mentioning comments: 1. I could get rid of rubygem-session dep, but, i did introduced it already in Fedora, still it has some troubles to build in rawhide i need to fix, so rubygem-rr will work with rubygem-session actually available in updates-testing. 2. Test suite is enabled and working without bundler and rake. 3. rspec version issue remains (1.x) 4. Yes i will start working on ruby 1.9 versions of all my pkgs soon. SPEC:http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rr/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM:http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rr/rubygem-rr-1.0.4-2.fc16.src.rpm $ rpmlint -v SPECS/rubygem-rr.spec SPECS/rubygem-rr.spec: I: checking-url http://rubygems.org/gems/rr-1.0.4.gem (timeout 10 seconds) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64-testing/result/rubygem-rr-1.0.4-2.fc16.noarch.rpm rubygem-rr.noarch: I: checking rubygem-rr.noarch: I: checking-url http://pivotallabs.com (timeout 10 seconds) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64-testing/result/rubygem-rr-doc-1.0.4-2.fc16.noarch.rpm rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: I: checking rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: I: checking-url http://pivotallabs.com (timeout 10 seconds) rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/Strategies/StrategyMethods/stub%21-i.yaml %21 ... ... ... rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/RecordedCalls/any%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Injections/DoubleInjection/subject_has_original_method_missing%3f-i.yaml %3f 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 86 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 730306] Review Request: jboss-interceptors-1.1-api - Interceptors 1.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730306 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |jboss-interceptors-api_1.1 |jboss-interceptors-1.1-api |- Interceptors 1.1 API |- Interceptors 1.1 API -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730306] Review Request: jboss-interceptors-api_1.1 - Interceptors 1.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730306 --- Comment #2 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 10:21:53 EST --- Package renamed to jboss-interceptors-1.1-api: Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-interceptors-api_1.1/2/jboss-interceptors-1.1-api.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-interceptors-api_1.1/2/jboss-interceptors-1.1-api-1.0.0-1.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 784239] Review Request: python-django-debug-toolbar - Configurable set of panels that display various debug information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784239 Arangamanikkannan Manickam arangamani.kan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||arangamani.kan...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Arangamanikkannan Manickam arangamani.kan...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 10:30:51 EST --- Please post rpmlint output on all RPM packages and SPEC files. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782456] Review Request: kredentials - kde kerberos ticket system tray monitor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782456 --- Comment #3 from Neil Horman nhor...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 10:32:34 EST --- James, new spec and src rpm for you: SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/kredentials.spec SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/kredentials-2.0-0.1.pre1.fc16.src.rpm I've made changes according to all your notes above (since you asked, the build failure was a missing BuildRequires on kdelibs-devel, corrected now). The only thing I took liberties with was the %doc set. Specifically I didn't include CMakeLists.txt and AdditionalChanges.txt as those are artifact files that are part of the kde build process and hold no relevant package information. Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 740799] Review Request: jboss-jad-api_1.2_spec - JavaEE Application Deployment 1.2 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740799 --- Comment #2 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 10:44:45 EST --- Package renamed to jboss-jad-1.2-api: Spec URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-jad-api_1.2_spec/2/jboss-jad-1.2-api.spec SRPM URL: http://goldmann.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-jad-api_1.2_spec/2/jboss-jad-1.2-api-1.0.0-1.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 740799] Review Request: jboss-jad-1.2-api - JavaEE Application Deployment 1.2 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740799 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |jboss-jad-api_1.2_spec -|jboss-jad-1.2-api - JavaEE |JavaEE Application |Application Deployment 1.2 |Deployment 1.2 API |API -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 770776] Review Request: jboss-jaspi-api_1.0_spec - JBoss Java Authentication SPI for Containers 1.0 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=770776 --- Comment #1 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 10:59:09 EST --- Ricardo, could you please rename the package to jboss-jaspi-1.0-api? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 692733] Review Request: openvas-cli - Command-line tool to drive OpenVAS 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=692733 --- Comment #5 from Michal Ambroz re...@seznam.cz 2012-01-24 11:04:57 EST --- Tool omp has got problem to connect and authenticate to the openvas-manager. Code is somewhere in openvas-libraries (omp/*). Maybe we hit another gnutls 2.12 bug/feature as this is working with different versions of gnutls. Authentication details get sent to server, but server directly responds with with ACK, FIN. If I send the same data over gnutls-cli everything works fine. The omp client then hangs forever. --- back trace from omp -- Program received signal SIGINT, Interrupt. 0x00110424 in __kernel_vsyscall () (gdb) bt #0 0x00110424 in __kernel_vsyscall () #1 0x4b6c9da1 in recv () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/socket.S:61 #2 0x434e6614 in recv (__flags=0, __n=5, __buf=0x80683a0, __fd=10) at /usr/include/bits/socket2.h:45 #3 system_read (ptr=0xa, data=0x80683a0, data_size=5) at system.c:99 #4 0x434ba13b in _gnutls_read (session=0x8060ca8, bufel=0xbfffee3c, size=5, pull_func=0x434e65e0 system_read) at gnutls_buffers.c:318 #5 0x434baa7a in _gnutls_io_read_buffered (session=0x8060ca8, total=5, recv_type=4294967295) at gnutls_buffers.c:564 #6 0x434b6d80 in _gnutls_recv_int (session=0x8060ca8, type=GNUTLS_APPLICATION_DATA, htype=4294967295, data=0x21b040 , sizeofdata=1048576) at gnutls_record.c:956 #7 0x434b7e4c in gnutls_record_recv (session=0x8060ca8, data=0x21b040, sizeofdata=1048576) at gnutls_record.c:1246 #8 0x00213e1b in try_read_entity_and_string (session=0x8051858, timeout=0, entity=0xb01c, string_return=0x0) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/xml.c:492 #9 0x00214414 in try_read_entity (session=0x8051858, timeout=0, entity=0xb01c) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/xml.c:688 #10 0x0021444c in read_entity (session=0x8051858, entity=0xb01c) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/xml.c:702 #11 0x00214ea0 in omp_authenticate (session=0x8051858, username=0x8051540 aaa, password=0x8051580 bbb) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/omp.c:213 #12 0x0804b45b in manager_open (connection=0x8051858) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-cli-1.1.4/omp/omp.c:189 #13 0x0804a70d in main (argc=1, argv=0xb164) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-cli-1.1.4/omp/omp.c:1411 --- back trace from gsd - #0 0x00110424 in __kernel_vsyscall () #1 0x4b6c9dc8 in recv () at ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/socket.S:97 #2 0x434e6614 in recv (__flags=0, __n=5, __buf=0x84abe50, __fd=19) at /usr/include/bits/socket2.h:45 #3 system_read (ptr=0x13, data=0x84abe50, data_size=5) at system.c:99 #4 0x434ba13b in _gnutls_read (session=0x84ac038, bufel=0xbfffddcc, size=5, pull_func=0x434e65e0 system_read) at gnutls_buffers.c:318 #5 0x434baa7a in _gnutls_io_read_buffered (session=0x84ac038, total=5, recv_type=4294967295) at gnutls_buffers.c:564 #6 0x434b6d80 in _gnutls_recv_int (session=0x84ac038, type=GNUTLS_APPLICATION_DATA, htype=4294967295, data=0x21b040 , sizeofdata=1048576) at gnutls_record.c:956 #7 0x434b7e4c in gnutls_record_recv (session=0x84ac038, data=0x21b040, sizeofdata=1048576) at gnutls_record.c:1246 #8 0x00213e1b in try_read_entity_and_string (session=0x8345364, timeout=0, entity=0xbfffdfac, string_return=0x0) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/xml.c:492 #9 0x00214414 in try_read_entity (session=0x8345364, timeout=0, entity=0xbfffdfac) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/xml.c:688 #10 0x0021444c in read_entity (session=0x8345364, entity=0xbfffdfac) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/xml.c:702 #11 0x00214ea0 in omp_authenticate (session=0x8345364, username=0x81fddd8 , password=0x81fddd8 ) at /home/mambroz/rpmbuild/BUILD/openvas-libraries-4.0.6/omp/omp.c:213 #12 0x08138aa5 in omp_basic::authenticate (this=0xfe00, name=..., pwd=...) at /usr/src/debug/gsd-1.2.1/src/omp_basic.cpp:103 #13 0x08138bc5 in omp_basic::openConnection (this=0x8345360) at /usr/src/debug/gsd-1.2.1/src/omp_basic.cpp:126 #14 0x08139a15 in omp_connector::authenticate (this=0x8345520) at /usr/src/debug/gsd-1.2.1/src/omp_connector.cpp:223 #15 0x080bff46 in gsd_control::check_server (this=0x833e248, addr=..., port=9390, user=..., pwd=...) at /usr/src/debug/gsd-1.2.1/src/gsd_control.cpp:497 #16 0x08161313 in gsd_control::qt_static_metacall (_o=0x833e248, _c=QMetaObject::InvokeMetaMethod, _id=17, _a=0xbfffe23c) at /usr/src/debug/gsd-1.2.1/src/moc_gsd_control.cxx:192 #17 0x42029ea1 in QMetaObject::activate(QObject*, QMetaObject const*, int, void**) () from /usr/lib/libQtCore.so.4 #18 0x08164970 in gsd_dlg::sig_check_server (this=0x83786d0, _t1=..., _t2=9390, _t3=..., _t4=...) at /usr/src/debug/gsd-1.2.1/src/moc_gsd_dlg.cxx:196 #19 0x0811982c in
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 John Ellson john.ell...@comcast.net changed: What|Removed |Added CC||john.ell...@comcast.net --- Comment #5 from John Ellson john.ell...@comcast.net 2012-01-24 11:23:20 EST --- Presumably this is a package review? I didn't review the .spec file, but local rpmbuild of the package worked flawlessly for me on F16. Where would you like usage bug reports to be sent? Some of the things that bother me at the moment: - windows open underneath top panel - how to disable the exploding_window_when_moved_to_edge feature - how to change the corner used for desktop_overview when using top panel, its too close to the menu. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771252] Review Request: cinnamon - Window management and application launching for GNOME
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252 --- Comment #6 from leigh scott leigh123li...@googlemail.com 2012-01-24 11:43:15 EST --- (In reply to comment #5) Presumably this is a package review? I didn't review the .spec file, but local rpmbuild of the package worked flawlessly for me on F16. Where would you like usage bug reports to be sent? Some of the things that bother me at the moment: - windows open underneath top panel - how to disable the exploding_window_when_moved_to_edge feature - how to change the corner used for desktop_overview when using top panel, its too close to the menu. You could use the testing repo (It has the latest stable version). http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=274611 Could you report any issues here https://github.com/linuxmint/Cinnamon/issues?sort=createddirection=descstate=open - windows open underneath top panel The stable version fixes this issue. - how to change the corner used for desktop_overview when using top panel, its too close to the menu. I have already requested this and it's been approved https://github.com/linuxmint/Cinnamon/issues/156 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782546] Review Request: oxygen-gtk2 - Oxygen GTK+2 theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782546 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||rdie...@math.unl.edu AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu 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 784359] New: Review Request: qpid-guitools - GUI utilities for Red Hat MRG qpid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: qpid-guitools - GUI utilities for Red Hat MRG qpid https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784359 Summary: Review Request: qpid-guitools - GUI utilities for Red Hat MRG qpid Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: eal...@redhat.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://eallen.fedorapeople.org/qpid-guitools.spec SRPM URL: http://eallen.fedorapeople.org/qpid-guitools-1.0.0-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Graphical tools built with qt that display information about quid brokers, queues, messages, exchanges, etc. Nuno Santos has already volunteered to review this package. nsan...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784359] Review Request: qpid-guitools - GUI utilities for Red Hat MRG qpid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784359 Ernie eal...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) Flag||needinfo?(nsan...@redhat.co ||m) --- Comment #1 from Ernie eal...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 12:18:48 EST --- This is my first package so I guess I'll need a sponsor. Nuno Santos has volunteered. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782546] Review Request: oxygen-gtk2 - Oxygen GTK+2 theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782546 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2012-01-24 12:15:40 EST --- I think we could be careful here and include Conflicts: oxygen-gtk 1.2.0-2 instead, but I won't consider that a review blocker, and we can sort out the upgrade details with the meta-package post-review. Otherwise, package is clean, having been reviewed as oxygen-gtk not too long ago. :) rpmlint *rpm oxygen-gtk2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US gtk - gt, gt k oxygen-gtk2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pixmaps - pix maps, pix-maps, bitmaps oxygen-gtk2.src: W: strange-permission oxygen-gtk2-1.2.0.tar.bz2 0444L 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. mostly harmless. naming: ok sources: ok 975dfef679436c849a649c9d5d9ae0d3 oxygen-gtk2-1.2.0.tar.bz2 scriptlets: n/a macros: ok APPROVED. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782546] Review Request: oxygen-gtk2 - Oxygen GTK+2 theme
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782546 nucleo alekc...@googlemail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #4 from nucleo alekc...@googlemail.com 2012-01-24 12:33:15 EST --- Thanks. I will add Conflicts: oxygen-gtk 1.2.0-2 in git. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: oxygen-gtk2 Short Description: Oxygen GTK+2 theme Owners: rdieter nucleo Branches: f16 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 765652] Review Request: bvi - Display-oriented editor for binary files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=765652 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|bvi-1.3.2-6.fc15|bvi-1.3.2-6.el6 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-01-24 12:39:50 EST --- bvi-1.3.2-6.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 740160] Review Request: discount - An implementation of the Markdown language in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740160 --- Comment #13 from Craig Barnes cbgn...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 13:32:25 EST --- Hmm, I didn't really do any research or forward thinking with this renaming thing. I'm starting to think renaming the binary from markdown to discount might not be the best aproach. Case in point: Discount: * Ships with a full set of man pages * Has no external runtime dependencies * Is fast * Passes the markdown test suite 100% * Is already is Debian and OpenSUSE repositories without any file renaming v.s. python-markdown: * Requires a full Python distribution at runtime * Has a few known issues not conforming with the test suite * Is comparatively slow * Ships without any man pages * and most notably: recently had it's markdown binary renamed in Fedora to markdown_py[1] [1]: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=python-markdown.git;a=commitdiff;h=2ff5e4af8eaae64f8d73a686cc913c9208d0e52f In my mind, this seems to make a pretty strong case for using discount to provive /usr/bin/markdown. I'm just not so sure about the sample programs. Any suggestions? OpenSuse and Debian seem to package them as-is, without any renames, although they still seem far too generic to me. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 771462] Review Request: Wnotes - Graphical text notes for X Window System display
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771462 Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|sanjay.an...@gmail.com --- Comment #4 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 13:50:43 EST --- Thanks Matthia :) /me takes over -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 740160] Review Request: discount - An implementation of the Markdown language in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740160 --- Comment #14 from Craig Barnes cbgn...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 14:04:56 EST --- Updated spec: https://gist.github.com/1240217/bb5e0727a035d4597123f84587610187da1c8886 ...and SRPM: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2682668/fedora-remix/16/source/packages/discount-2.1.3-2.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 782220] Review Request: dlm - cluster infrastructure for dlm (distributed lock 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=782220 --- Comment #12 from Dave Teigland teigl...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 14:13:43 EST --- I've done a final release, location in new spec file. I've switched to standard service file, the missing bits from the init file can be someone else's problem. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782456] Review Request: kredentials - kde kerberos ticket system tray monitor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782456 --- Comment #4 from James Laska jla...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 14:30:13 EST --- [ PASS ] MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build produces. The output should be posted in the review.(refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint) # rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64/result/kredentials-*rpm kredentials.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kerberos - kerosene kredentials.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US kerberos - kerosene kredentials.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) kerberos - kerosene kredentials.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US kerberos - kerosene Safe to ignore kredentials.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 2.0-1 ['2.0-0.1.pre1.fc16', '2.0-0.1.pre1'] Ah, this would be nice to fix. Looks like the first %changelog entry uses the old version/release format kredentials.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary kredentials kredentials.x86_64: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/kredentials-2.0/INSTALL 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings. Safe to ignore [ PASS ] MUST: The package must be named according to the http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines Looks good [ PASS ] MUST: The upstream project URL should be http://freecode.com/projects/kredentials Fixed [ PASS ] MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package must be included in code%doc/code.(refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License Text) The %doc files look good. [ WARN ] MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in codeBuildRequires/code, except for any that are listed in the http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Exceptions_2 section of the Packaging Guidelines ; inclusion of those as codeBuildRequires/code is optional. Apply common sense. Apologies, I missed this previously ... looks like you'll need to add BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#desktop-file-install_usage) [ WARN ] MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. (refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#macros) Nice, looks like consistent use around $RPM_BUILD_ROOT I've added a small patch to consistently use some of the other %build macros. Feel free to take it or toss it ... entirely optional. [ PASS ] MUST: The upstream project URL should be http://freecode.com/projects/kredentials Looks good. Other nit ... You might consider calling out files (instead of using globs) in your %files. Moreso for the _bindir stuff. Just a thought Looks good, thanks. So just a few minor adjustments, and I think you'll be in good shape. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782456] Review Request: kredentials - kde kerberos ticket system tray monitor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782456 --- Comment #5 from James Laska jla...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 14:30:41 EST --- Created attachment 557297 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=557297 kredentials.patch -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 740160] Review Request: discount - An implementation of the Markdown language in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740160 --- Comment #15 from Martin Gieseking martin.giesek...@uos.de 2012-01-24 14:37:18 EST --- The renaming of /usr/bin/markdown to /usr/bin/markdown_py simplifies things a bit. However, python-markdown 2.1.0 was only pushed to rawhide (F17). The current release branches still provide 2.0.3. Thus, if you want to build discount for Fedora 17 as well, you might want to ask the maintainer of python-markdown whether it's possible to safely rename the binary. Since python-markdown is required by a couple of critical packages (e.g. bodhi-server, transifex) it's probably not a good idea to update to 2.1.0 in F16. Concerning the demo programs, I think the prefixed names discount-* are fine. I'll have a closer look at your SRPM in the next couple of days. Currently, I'm too busy. Just a quick note: You should not add files more than once, so drop the %doc files from the base package. They are installed by its dependency libmarkdown. If you don't have a sponsor yet, I can sponsor you. But I would like you to do some informal reviews to show a basic understanding of the packaging and review guidelines. Just pick a yet uncommented review request (one that's not blocked by FE-NEEDSPONSOR) from the review queue [1], check the items from list [2], and post your comments into the bug ticket. [1] http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEW.html [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772616] Review Request: epstool - A utility to create or extract preview images in EPS files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772616 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|epstool-3.08-2.fc16 |epstool-3.08-2.fc15 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-01-24 14:59:04 EST --- epstool-3.08-2.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772616] Review Request: epstool - A utility to create or extract preview images in EPS files
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772616 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||epstool-3.08-2.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-01-24 14:58:56 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-01-24 14:58:56 EST --- epstool-3.08-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782456] Review Request: kredentials - kde kerberos ticket system tray monitor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782456 --- Comment #6 from Neil Horman nhor...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 15:05:13 EST --- SPEC: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/kredentials.spec SRPM: http://people.redhat.com/nhorman/kredentials-2.0-0.1.pre1.fc16.src.rpm There you go, fixed up as per your comments. Thanks for the through 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 783716] Review Request:gmail-notify-ext - Gmail checker Gnome Online Accounts based
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783716 Stephen Gordon sgor...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sgor...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from Stephen Gordon sgor...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 15:32:41 EST --- - Based on previous extensions that have been approved, consider renaming the package to fit the form gnome-shell-extension-*. - The license string is not recognised, see the following for a list of valid values. In this instance you possibly want GPLv2 or GPLv2+. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing - Use the %find_lang macro for the locale files: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Handling_Locale_Files - This looks like a noarch package but is not marked as such: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#no-binary - Consider adding a README: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#no-documentation - Consider expanding the %description field, currently it contains less information than the Summary. Full rpmlint output: gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: invalid-license GPL2 gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: E: no-binary gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: no-documentation gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/cs/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/fr/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/gl/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/hu/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/nl/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/pl/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo gmail-notify-ext.x86_64: W: file-not-in-%lang /usr/share/locale/se/LC_MESSAGES/gmail_notify.mo 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 12 warnings. Note I'm not sponsored, so can't take this review request, but addressing the above may help expedite the review process when someone else does. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772786] Review Request: converseen - A batch image conversion tool written in C++ with Qt4 and Magick++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772786 Mario Santagiuliana fed...@marionline.it changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #12 from Mario Santagiuliana fed...@marionline.it 2012-01-24 15:47:29 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: converseen Short Description: A batch image conversion tool written in C++ with Qt4 and Magick++ Owners: marionline Branches: f15 f16 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772786] Review Request: converseen - A batch image conversion tool written in C++ with Qt4 and Magick++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772786 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 15:51:35 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 734275] Review Request: aqemu - A QT graphical interface to QEMU and KVM
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=734275 Stephen Gordon sgor...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=783716 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783716] Review Request:gmail-notify-ext - Gmail checker Gnome Online Accounts based
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783716 Stephen Gordon sgor...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added See Also||https://bugzilla.redhat.com ||/show_bug.cgi?id=734275 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 782661] Review Request: ehcache-sizeof-agent - Size of agent for ehcache
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782661 Eric Christensen e...@christensenplace.us changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||e...@christensenplace.us AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|e...@christensenplace.us 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 772608] Review Request: ovirt-guest-agent - oVirt Guest 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=772608 Stephen Gordon sgor...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sgor...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Stephen Gordon sgor...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 16:57:18 EST --- - In the Requires and BuildRequires statements some use %define macros for the version and some hardcode them. It would probably be best to choose one method of specifying the versions and use it consistently. - The Source0 line is expected to contain a URL pointing to the archive or, where applicable, just the name of the archive accompanied by a comment explaining where it was generated from: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL - Given the ExclusiveArch directive I am not sure this macro is required?: %ifnarch s390 s390x ppc64 BuildRequires: xorg-x11-server-Xorg %endif - There are a few spelling errors in the description, as well as mixed use of tabs/spaces, detected by rpmlint. Output of rpmlint on the SRPM (given oVirt is the project name I think it is probably fair to ignore the first warning): ovirt-guest-agent.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C oVirt Guest Agent ovirt-guest-agent.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US managment - management, engagement, Mantegna ovirt-guest-agent.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US runtime - run time, run-time, rudiment ovirt-guest-agent.src:185: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 185, tab: line 180) ovirt-guest-agent.src: W: invalid-url Source0: ovirt-guest-agent-1.0.0.tar.bz2 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 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 782178] Review Request: sha2 - SHA Implementation 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=782178 Thibault North thibault.no...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Thibault North thibault.no...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 16:56:28 EST --- rpmlint output: sha2.src: I: checking sha2.src: I: checking-url http://www.aarongifford.com/computers/sha.html (timeout 10 seconds) sha2.src: I: checking-url http://www.aarongifford.com/computers/sha2-1.0.1.tgz (timeout 10 seconds) sha2.x86_64: I: checking sha2.x86_64: I: checking-url http://www.aarongifford.com/computers/sha.html (timeout 10 seconds) sha2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sha2 sha2.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary sha2speed sha2-devel.x86_64: I: checking sha2-devel.x86_64: I: checking-url http://www.aarongifford.com/computers/sha.html (timeout 10 seconds) sha2-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation sha2-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking sha2-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://www.aarongifford.com/computers/sha.html (timeout 10 seconds) /home/tnorth/rpmbuild/SPECS/sha2.spec: I: checking-url http://www.aarongifford.com/computers/sha2-1.0.1.tgz (timeout 10 seconds) 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784359] Review Request: qpid-guitools - GUI utilities for Red Hat MRG qpid
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784359
Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||karlthe...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Haïkel Guémar karlthe...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 17:03:40
EST ---
Nice tool for working with QPid. Just few advices:
* you don't need to require glibc-common as BR (it's already provided in the
minimal build chroot)
* use the %cmake macro
* discrepancies between version field (1.0.0) and changelog (0.1)
* does not build under mock (missing BR: cmake = 2.6.0)
* your BR should be qpid-qmf-devel and qpid-cpp-client-devel
* either you plan to maintain your package under EL5 and you should handle
buildroot cleaning or you don't plan maintaining it under EL5 and should remove
the %defattr macro
* a typo in your description: quid instead of qpid
* wrong license: license.txt says it's under Apache License 2.0, by the way,
GPL alone is not enough (valid values: GPLv{2,3}{,+} etc ...)
* i recommand you to check your src.rpm and binary rpm with the rpmlint tool.
Building your src.rpm with the mock tool is also a must.
Since I assume you're also the upstream maintainer:
* you should version your source tarball
* you should also add installation bits inside your build system, with cmake
something like that:
install(TARGET xview RUNTIME DESTINATION bin)
* you should also rename your binary upstream (xview will also conflicts in
other distro which ships xloadimage) qpid-gbroker might confuse people since
it's written Qt4 (people usually expect that software that have g in their
name to be Gtk+ application)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772786] Review Request: converseen - A batch image conversion tool written in C++ with Qt4 and Magick++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772786 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-01-24 17:29:59 EST --- converseen-0.4.8-4.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/converseen-0.4.8-4.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 772786] Review Request: converseen - A batch image conversion tool written in C++ with Qt4 and Magick++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772786 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-01-24 17:28:47 EST --- converseen-0.4.8-4.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/converseen-0.4.8-4.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 772786] Review Request: converseen - A batch image conversion tool written in C++ with Qt4 and Magick++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772786 Mario Santagiuliana fed...@marionline.it changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-01-24 17:27:07 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 656082] Review Request: cprops - library of C prototyping functions, mostly searching
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656082 --- Comment #19 from Philip Prindeville phil...@redfish-solutions.com 2012-01-24 18:17:18 EST --- Updated: http://fedorapeople.org/~philipp/libcprops-0.1.12-1.fc16.src.rpm http://fedorapeople.org/~philipp/libcprops.spec $ rpmlint libcprops.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint libcprops-0.1.12-1.fc16.src.rpm libcprops.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US trie - tire, true, tie libcprops.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tcp - pct, tsp, tip libcprops.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http - HTTP libcprops.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api - pi, ape, apt libcprops.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dbms - DBMS, dims, dams 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 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 656082] Review Request: cprops - library of C prototyping functions, mostly searching
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656082 --- Comment #20 from Philip Prindeville phil...@redfish-solutions.com 2012-01-24 18:39:31 EST --- And post-install: $ rpmlint libcprops libcprops-devel libcprops.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US trie - tire, true, tie libcprops.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US tcp - pct, tsp, tip libcprops.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US http - HTTP libcprops.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US api - pi, ape, apt libcprops.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US dbms - DBMS, dims, dams libcprops.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcp_dbms_mysql.so.0.0.0 linux-vdso.so.1 libcprops.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcprops.so.15.0.0 linux-vdso.so.1 libcprops.x86_64: W: unused-direct-shlib-dependency /usr/lib64/libcp_dbms_postgres.so.0.0.0 linux-vdso.so.1 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. $ I'm told that the warnings for linux-vdso can be safely ignored as they're an artifact of the x86_64. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 740160] Review Request: discount - An implementation of the Markdown language in C
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740160 --- Comment #16 from Craig Barnes cbgn...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 19:11:55 EST --- Updates: * Tue Jan 24 2012 Craig Barnes c...@igbarn.es - 2.1.3-3 - Remove duplicate docs from base package (already included in libmarkdown) - Add --enable-all-features flag to turn on all stable, optional features - Specify single include file (mkdio.h) instead of using glob matching - Make man3 and man7 file matching more accurate (specify the mkd prefix) Spec: https://gist.github.com/1240217/5fb9f9fea692bef24362706abd4c69efbc114b8c SRPM: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2682668/fedora-remix/16/source/packages/discount-2.1.3-3.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 766083] Review Request Derelict - Collection of wrapper for game programming in D
Please do not reply directly 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 #15 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 19:39:03 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: derelict Short Description: Collection of wrapper for 3D programming in D Owners: bioinfornatics Branches: f17 InitialCC: bioinfornatics -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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] Review Request Derelict - Collection of wrapper for game programming in D
Please do not reply directly 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 MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from MERCIER Jonathan bioinfornat...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 19:38:23 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: derelict Short Description: Collection of wrapper for game programming in D Owners: bioinfornatics Branches: f17 InitialCC: bioinfornatics -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769096] Review Request: gnome-shell-extension-windowoverlay-icons - Easily discover which application to select by viewing the app icons in the windows overview.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769096 --- Comment #14 from Mohamed El Morabity pikachu.2...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 20:21:07 EST --- $ rpmlint gnome-shell-extension-sustmi-historymanager-prefix-search-3.0-5.git72282ce.fc16.noarch.rpm gnome-shell-extension-sustmi-historymanager-prefix-search.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eg - eh, e, g gnome-shell-extension-sustmi-historymanager-prefix-search.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C Use PageUp and PageDown to move in HistoryManager (eg. RunCommand, Looking Glass) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 1 warnings. You should fix the description of gnome-shell-extension-sustmi-historymanager-prefix-search. The spellong issues can be ignored. Don't forget also to modify the description of this review, to comply with the current name of the source 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 781688] Review Request: lv2-mdaEPiano - LV2 port of the MDA VST piano plugin
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781688 Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Orcan Ogetbil oget.fed...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 20:27:26 EST --- Yeah, I verify that the source tree is genuine, which, I think, is enough. The package is good to go now. This package (lv2-mdaEPiano) is APPROVED by oget -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784457] New: Review Request: systemd-ui - UI Tools for systemd
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: systemd-ui - UI Tools for systemd https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784457 Summary: Review Request: systemd-ui - UI Tools for systemd Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lpoet...@redhat.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://people.freedesktop.org/~kay/systemd-ui.spec SRPM URL: http://people.freedesktop.org/~kay/systemd-ui-0-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: Graphical frontend for systemd We recently split off the Gtk UI tools that were previously included in the main systemd tarball into a tarball of its own, and we'd like to -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 766083] Review Request Derelict - Collection of wrapper for game programming in D
Please do not reply directly 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 #16 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 20:50:32 EST --- Summary and SCM package names don't match. Also, f17==devel, no need to 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 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co |nob...@fedoraproject.org |m | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 569582] Review Request: udev-browse - Udev browser tool
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=569582 Lennart Poettering lpoet...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||lpoet...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Lennart Poettering lpoet...@redhat.com 2012-01-24 21:34:13 EST --- As I am upstream for this, and nothing happened on this package I think I should take this one over. I have now fixed upstream, to honour $CFLAGS, and the .spec file to honour $RPM_OPT_FLAGS, which fixes the debuginfo issue. New .spec and srpm are now available here: Spec URL: http://0pointer.de/public/udev-browse.spec SRPM URL: http://0pointer.de/public/udev-browse-0.2-1.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 782661] Review Request: ehcache-sizeof-agent - Size of agent for ehcache
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782661
Eric Christensen e...@christensenplace.us changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Eric Christensen e...@christensenplace.us 2012-01-24
23:05:48 EST ---
OK MUST: rpmlint must be run on the source rpm and all binary rpms the build
produces. The output should be posted in the review.[1]
OK MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines
.
OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec unless your package has an exemption. [2] .
OK MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines .
OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet
the Licensing Guidelines .
OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license. [3]
NA MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.[4]
OK MUST: The spec file must be written in American English. [5]
OK MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible. [6]
OK MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source,
as provided in the spec URL. Reviewers should use md5sum for this task. If no
upstream URL can be specified for this package, please see the Source URL
Guidelines for how to deal with this.
OK MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
at least one primary architecture. [7]
OK MUST: If the package does not successfully compile, build or work on an
architecture, then those architectures should be listed in the spec in
ExcludeArch. Each architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in
bugzilla, describing the reason that the package does not compile/build/work on
that architecture. The bug number MUST be placed in a comment, next to the
corresponding ExcludeArch line. [8]
OK MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of the Packaging Guidelines ;
inclusion of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using the
%find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.[9]
OK MUST: Every binary RPM package (or subpackage) which stores shared library
files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must
call ldconfig in %post and %postun. [10]
OK MUST: Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries.[11]
OK MUST: If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state
this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for
relocation of that specific package. Without this, use of Prefix: /usr is
considered a blocker. [12]
OK MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. [13]
OK MUST: A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec
file's %files listings. (Notable exception: license texts in specific
situations)[14]
OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be set
with executable permissions, for example. [15]
OK MUST: Each package must consistently use macros. [16]
OK MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. [17]
OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. (The
definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but is not
restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity). [18]
OK MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application. To summarize: If it is in %doc, the program must
run properly if it is not present. [18]
OK MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package. [19]
OK MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package. [20]
OK MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in
a -devel package. [19]
OK MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the base
package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
%{version}-%{release} [21]
OK MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these must be
removed in the spec if they are built.[20]
OK MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop
file, and that file must be properly installed with desktop-file-install in the
%install section. If you feel that your packaged GUI
[Bug 784239] Review Request: python-django-debug-toolbar - Configurable set of panels that display various debug information
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784239 --- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge mru...@matthias-runge.de 2012-01-25 02:19:07 EST --- rpmlint follows, one SRPM, one RPM, one SPEC file [mrunge@mrungexp SPECS]$ rpmlint ./python-django-debug-toolbar.spec ../SRPMS/python-django-debug-toolbar-0.9.3-1.fc16.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/python-django-debug-toolbar-0.9.3-1.fc16.noarch.rpm python-django-debug-toolbar.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py - pt, p, y python-django-debug-toolbar.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US args - rags, gars, ares python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py - pt, p, y python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US args - rags, gars, ares python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/debug_toolbar/templates/debug_toolbar/panels/._profiling.html python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/debug_toolbar/media/debug_toolbar/css/._toolbar.css python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/debug_toolbar/templates/debug_toolbar/panels/._sql.html python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/debug_toolbar/media/debug_toolbar/js/._jquery.cookie.js python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/debug_toolbar/templates/debug_toolbar/panels/._sql_explain.html python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/debug_toolbar/templates/debug_toolbar/panels/._sql_profile.html python-django-debug-toolbar.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/debug_toolbar/templates/debug_toolbar/panels/._sql_select.html 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 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
