[Bug 772521] Review Request: clib - A Library for providing advanced C functions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772521 --- Comment #5 from Jens Petersen 2012-02-06 02:41:28 EST --- This sounds useful - maybe you could also compare with glib2 which also provides various data structures: http://developer.gnome.org/glib/2.30/glib-data-types.html and is quite widely used already in fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787564] New: Review Request: fonts-tweak-tool - a GUI tool for customizing fonts per language on desktops using fontconfig.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: fonts-tweak-tool - a GUI tool for customizing fonts per language on desktops using fontconfig. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787564 Summary: Review Request: fonts-tweak-tool - a GUI tool for customizing fonts per language on desktops using fontconfig. Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: j...@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://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/fonts-tweak-tool/fonts-tweak-tool.spec SRPM URL: http://jamesni.fedorapeople.org/fonts-tweak-tool/fonts-tweak-tool-0.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: fonts-tweak-tool is a GUI tool for customizing fonts per language on desktops using fontconfig. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 786808] Review Request: rubygem-ammeter - Write specs for your Rails 3+ generators
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786808 Bohuslav Kabrda changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Bohuslav Kabrda 2012-02-06 01:45:57 EST --- Thank you for your review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-ammeter Short Description: Write specs for your Rails 3+ generators Owners: bkabrda Branches: 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 787561] New: Review Request: torsocks - A transparent socks proxy for use with tor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: torsocks - A transparent socks proxy for use with tor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787561 Summary: Review Request: torsocks - A transparent socks proxy for use with tor Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: e...@christensenplace.us 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://sparks.fedorapeople.org/Packages/torsocks.spec SRPM URL: http://sparks.fedorapeople.org/Packages/torsocks-1.2-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Torsocks allows you to use most socks-friendly applications in a safe way with Tor. It ensures that DNS requests are handled safely and explicitly rejects UDP traffic from the application you're using. $ rpmlint /home/christensene/rpmbuild/SRPMS/torsocks-1.2-1.fc16.src.rpm /home/christensene/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/torsocks-1.2-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm /home/christensene/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/torsocks-debuginfo-1.2-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm /home/christensene/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/torsocks-devel-1.2-1.fc16.x86_64.rpm torsocks.src: W: invalid-url Source0: https://torsocks.googlecode.com/files/torsocks-1.2.tar.gz HTTP Error 404: Not Found torsocks-devel.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libtsocks -> flintlocks torsocks-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785057] Review Request: perl-Net-Server-Coro - Co-operative multithreaded server using Coro
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785057 Mathieu Bridon changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|NOTABUG |NEXTRELEASE --- Comment #6 from Mathieu Bridon 2012-02-05 23:13:42 EST --- Thanks Petr, good catch! I've fixed this, it's building and I'll obsolete the packages I had already submitted to testing. (Note: I see this bug is fixed as NOTABUG rather than NEXTRELEASE. I guess I chose the wrong one when I closed it, so I'm changing it now, in case that matters to somebody) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 772993] Review Request: globus-gram-audit - Globus Toolkit - GRAM Jobmanager Auditing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772993
Steve Traylen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||steve.tray...@cern.ch
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|steve.tray...@cern.ch
Flag||fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Steve Traylen 2012-02-05 19:14:33
EST ---
Package Review
==
APPROVED
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.
ASL 2.0, good clear licensing.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary 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: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
EPEL 4 even is on the cards.
[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: defattr() present in %files -f package.filelist section. This
is OK if packaging for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed
[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 Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[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.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint globus-gram-audit-3.1-2.fc17.noarch.rpm
globus-gram-audit.noarch: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
globus-gram-audit.noarch: E: executable-marked-as-config-file
/etc/cron.hourly/globus-gram-audit
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint globus-gram-audit-3.1-2.fc17.src.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
This is new one on me and clearly contradicts that packages in /etc/
should be configuration files.
Please do a tiny bit of research or ignore for now.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/steve/tmp/review/772993/globus_gram_audit-3.1.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 4893df9928b92202c6688aae0b23ec5b
MD5SUM upstream package : 4893df9928b92202c6688aae0b23ec5b
Deserves a comment -- how much easier does that make 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.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
Issues:
None unless you want to investigate the executable cron job mentioned above.
Generated by fedora-review 0.1.2
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783778] Review Request: libgta - Library that implements the Generic Tagged Arrays file format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783778 Joonas Sarajärvi changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Joonas Sarajärvi 2012-02-05 19:04:50 EST --- Review for libgta-1.0.2-1 Rpmlint output: $ rpmlint SPECS/libgta.spec SRPMS/libgta-1.0.2-1.fc16.src.rpm RPMS/x86_64/libgta-*.rpm libgta.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. | MUST Item | Comments | |-+--| | Package name| OK | | Spec file name | OK | | Packaging guidelines| OK | | Licensing | OK | | License match | OK | | License file in %doc| OK | | Spec file English | OK | | Spec file legibilty | OK | | Source archive md5 | OK [1] | | Builds on primary archs | OK [2] | | Build dependencies | OK [3] | | Locales | OK | | ldconfig calls in %post, %postun| OK | | No copies of system libraries | OK | | Relocatability | OK | | Owns all created dirs | OK | | %files item unqueness | OK | | File permissions| OK | | Macro use consitence| OK | | Code or permissible content | OK | | Large docs in -doc subpackage | OK [4] | | %doc contents do not affect use | OK | | Header files in -devel subpkg | OK | | Static libs in -static subpkg | OK | | .so symlink in -devel subpkg| OK | | -devel requires base package| OK | | No libtool archives | OK | | .desktop file if needed | OK | | other packages' files or dirs not owned | OK | | All filesnames are UTF-8| OK | |-+--| | SHOULD item | Comments | |-+--| | License text request| OK | | Translations of description and summary | none | | Package builds in mock | OK | | Builds on all primary archs | OK | | Package functions as described | OK [5] | | Scriptlets are sane | OK | | Subpackage deps on base package | OK | | pkgconfig file placement| OK | | prefer package deps over file deps | OK | | man pages for binaries/scriprs | OK | Notes: [1] Md5 sum: 92159683385f295bb6f21d5dedee. [2] Builds both on x86_64 and i386. [3] Builds in mock. [4] Reference documentation takes 1.7 megabytes. I do not feel it is big enough to block the review, but would myself prefer having them and the examples in a -doc subpkg. [5] All the shipped example programs can be built. Did not test if the library actually works as described. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787517] New: Review Request: dawati-artwork - Artwork for the Dawati UX
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: dawati-artwork - Artwork for the Dawati UX https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787517 Summary: Review Request: dawati-artwork - Artwork for the Dawati UX Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: pbrobin...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- SPEC: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/dawati-artwork.spec SRPM: http://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/dawati-artwork-0.90.6-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: The artwork, cursors, icons, backgrounds and sounds for the Dawati UX koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3763661 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672221] Review Request: sqlite3-dbf - Converter of XBase / FoxPro tables to SQLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672221 --- Comment #4 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 17:40:21 EST --- The branches have been renamed, they should be "f15 f16 el5 el6". I think f17 won't be branched for a few more 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 723427] Review Request: jinput - Java Game Controller 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=723427 --- Comment #10 from Guido Grazioli 2012-02-05 17:23:55 EST --- Hello Jerry, I think you need to open a new review request bug, then close this one as a duplicate; please do it, just dont forget lwjgl as a dependent bug. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 783778] Review Request: libgta - Library that implements the Generic Tagged Arrays file format
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783778 Joonas Sarajärvi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||m...@iki.fi AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|m...@iki.fi 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 638459] Review Request: mosquitto - An Open Source MQTT v3 Broker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=638459 --- Comment #3 from Andrew Elwell 2012-02-05 17:12:53 EST --- Typical Developers -- no releases for ages, then 2 come along at once :-) 0.15 now out and packaged up: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6594808/Fedora/mosquitto-0.15-1.fc16.src.rpm http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6594808/Fedora/mosquitto.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 767082] Review Request: wxpropgrid - A property sheet control for wxWidgets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767082 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|wxpropgrid-1.4.15-1.fc15|wxpropgrid-1.4.15-1.fc16 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-05 16:53:24 EST --- wxpropgrid-1.4.15-1.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 767082] Review Request: wxpropgrid - A property sheet control for wxWidgets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=767082 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||wxpropgrid-1.4.15-1.fc15 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-05 16:51:22 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-05 16:51:22 EST --- wxpropgrid-1.4.15-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 736801] Review Request: pure-gen - A Pure C bindings generator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=736801 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-05 16:50:03 EST --- pure-gen-0.15-1.fc16 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 787510] New: Review Request: glm - Library for doing GLSL-like math in C++
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: glm - Library for doing GLSL-like math in C++ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787510 Summary: Review Request: glm - Library for doing GLSL-like math in C++ Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: m...@iki.fi 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://muep.fedorapeople.org/glm/glm.spec SRPM URL: http://muep.fedorapeople.org/glm/glm-0.9.3.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: GLM is a C++ library for doing math operations required in many OpenGL based applications. Its interface has been designed to resemble the built-in matrix and vector types of the OpenGL shading language. Note: Rpmlint will complain about a couple of empty .inl files. These were not removed because other code in the package uses #include with their names. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784847] Review Request: aplpy - The Astronomical Plotting Library in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784847 Golo Fuchert changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Golo Fuchert 2012-02-05 15:36:19 EST --- Hi Germán, first of all, the bugzilla ticket needs to have the same name as the package itself before the SCM request, so you have to rename it to APLpy as well. But now the review: rpmlint SRPMS/APLpy-0.9.6-2.fc16.src.rpm RPMS/noarch/APLpy-0.9.6-2.fc16.noarch.rpm SPECS/APLpy.spec APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US grayscale -> gray scale, gray-scale, graceless APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorscale -> color scale, color-scale, colorless APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorbars -> color bars, color-bars, colors APLpy.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalebars -> scale bars, scale-bars, scalars APLpy.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-matplotlib APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US grayscale -> gray scale, gray-scale, graceless APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorscale -> color scale, color-scale, colorless APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US customizable -> customization APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US colorbars -> color bars, color-bars, colors APLpy.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US scalebars -> scale bars, scale-bars, scalars APLpy.noarch: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/APLpy-0.9.6/INSTALL 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 11 warnings. All the warnings can be ignored, however the Packaging Guidelines recommend _not_ to contain INSTALL files. Concerning the error: This is a false positive. If you want to, you can report this as a bug (for rpmlint I guess). There is a filter for such packages. [+] = ok [o] = does not apply [-] = not ok MUST: [+] The package is named according to the guidelines [+] Spec file name matches base package name [+] The package follows the Packaging Guidelines [+] The license is an approved licence (MIT) [+] The License field matches the actual licence [+] License file from source file is included in %doc [+] The spec file is written in American English [+] The spec file is legible [+] Used sources match with upstream sources (md5) $ md5sum APLpy-0.9.6.tar.gz.* bfd8e61ea1139dcc3d8bdf94eee03df3 APLpy-0.9.6.tar.gz.packaged bfd8e61ea1139dcc3d8bdf94eee03df3 APLpy-0.9.6.tar.gz.upstream [+] Package build at least on one primary architecture (i686) [o] No architectures known, where the package doesn't build [+] All build dependencies are listed in the BuildRequires section [o] No locales for the package [o] Package stores no shared libraries [o] Package does not bundle copies of system libraries [o] Package is not relocatable [+] Package owns all directories it installs [+] No files are listed more then once in the %files section [+] File permissions are set properly (%defattr(...) is used) [+] Consistent use of macros [+] Package contains code and documentation only, no content [+] No large documentation files [+] %doc files do not affect runtime [o] No Header files included [o] No static libraries [o] No library files ending with .so included [o] No -devel subpackage [+] No libtool .la archives included [o] No GUI application, no need for a .desktop file [+] Package does not own files or directories that are owned by other packages [+] All filenames are valid UTF-8 SHOULD: [+] The package builds in mock python specific: [+] Python egg is being built from source [o] No compat package. - Comments: - You have to change the name of this ticket - I would recommend not to include INSTALL in the package - You may want to report a bug concerning the rpmlint error - The spec file contains some tags or commands which are no longer needed if you package for Fedora only. Those that I noticed where: BuildRoot %defattr(-,root,root,-) %clean Please consider removing them. If you intend to package for RHEL, some might still be needed, though. 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 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 --- Comment #14 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 15:08:50 EST --- Created attachment 559502 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=559502 patch for removing the now-missing libpdf dirs libpdf itself is still present, but all the subdirectories (that are in reportlab) are now missing. Stop setup.py from trying to install them -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 --- Comment #12 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 15:06:38 EST --- Created attachment 559500 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=559500 spec with some unbundling Attached spec has libpdf replaced by a stub that loads the system reportlab module. I tried doing the same to imaging, but it's a bit tricky as that is used during the build process. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 --- Comment #13 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 15:07:52 EST --- Created attachment 559501 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=559501 libpdf stub module the stub file for src/libpdf/__init__.py -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 --- Comment #15 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 15:09:50 EST --- Pavel, if you could upstream those, perhaps they'd be able to either stop bundling, or at least tell us how to remove the remaining bundled libraries. Ping me when there's any progress :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 --- Comment #11 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 14:40:04 EST --- I had to strip a bundled library from a Python package before, so let me see if this can be quickly fixed. BTW, upstream's project site is horribly messy -- the 0.9.1 final download is not listed on the download page, but they already have a 0.9.2pre -- and the download link works! Really odd -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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: libcprops - C prototyping tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=656082 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #33 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-05 14:31:11 EST --- libcprops-0.1.12-1.1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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 523877] Review Request: CBFlib - crystallography binary format 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=523877 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #50 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-05 14:31:55 EST --- CBFlib-0.9.2.3-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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 539693] Review Request: plowshare - command-line downloader/uploader for some of the most popular file-sharing websites
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=539693 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed|2011-03-31 12:59:42 |2012-02-05 13:25:26 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 761319] Review Request: gtkd - It is a D binding and OO wrapper of GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=761319 --- Comment #20 from MERCIER Jonathan 2012-02-05 12:28:55 EST --- http://bioinfornatics.fedorapeople.org/gtkd.spec http://bioinfornatics.fedorapeople.org/gtkd-1.5.1-19.20120205svn932.fc16.src.rpm I have worked with upstream for fixx all of this issue - RPMLINT - $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SRPMS/gtkd-1.5.1-19.20120205svn932.fc16.src.rpm gtkd.src: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) binding -> building gtkd.src: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) and -> ans, an, ad gtkd.src: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) wrapper -> rapper, frapper, w rapper gtkd.src: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) of -> off, if, or gtkd.src: W: spelling-error %description -l fr multi -> mufti, multiple gtkd.src: W: invalid-url Source0: gtkd-20120205svn932.tar.xz 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/SPECS/gtkd.spec /home/builder/rpmbuild/SPECS/gtkd.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: gtkd-20120205svn932.tar.xz 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. $ rpmlint ~/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/gtkd-* gtkd-devhelp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) and -> ans, an, ad gtkd-devhelp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) reference -> référence, référencé gtkd-devhelp.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) manuals -> manuels, manuaires gtkd-devhelp.noarch: W: no-documentation gtkd-geany-tags.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) autocompletion -> auto completion, auto-completion, completion gtkd-geany-tags.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) enable -> ensable, entable, tenable gtkd-geany-tags.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(fr) autocompletion -> autoconsommation, automutilation gtkd-geany-tags.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US autocompletion -> auto completion, auto-completion, completion gtkd-geany-tags.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l fr l'autocompletion -> autoconsommation gtkd-geany-tags.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 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 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 Steven Dake changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 --- Comment #13 from Steven Dake 2012-02-05 12:00:31 EST --- Gal, A short recommendation when making updates to spec files. After each revision of a spec file, please make a new bugzilla comment entry separate from questions for the reviewer that states the spec file location and src.rpm file location. Also take care to increase the version numbers and update changelog in the spec file. Example: " Updated spec file to fix previous reported problems: SPEC: link SRPM: link " -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784156] Review Request: uwsgi - Fast, self-healing, application container server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784156 Steven Dake changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784156] Review Request: uwsgi - Fast, self-healing, application container server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784156 --- Comment #7 from Steven Dake 2012-02-05 11:37:49 EST --- Gal, As part of your sponsorship process please use the example review contained below as a template. The checklist is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines An example review is here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781831 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784156] Review Request: uwsgi - Fast, self-healing, application container server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784156 --- Comment #6 from Steven Dake 2012-02-05 11:34:34 EST --- Gal, Regarding ldconfig in %post section: From guidelines: Whenever possible (and feasible), Fedora Packages containing libraries should build them as shared libraries. In addition, every binary RPM package which contains shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths The key determinate on ldconfig being run in %post section is if the shared object is in the default linker paths. From man ldconfig: ldconfig creates the necessary links and cache to the most recent shared libraries found in the directories specified on the command line, in the file /etc/ld.so.conf, and in the trusted directories (/lib and /usr/lib). The cache is used by the run-time linker, ld.so or ld- linux.so. ldconfig checks the header and filenames of the libraries it encounters when determining which versions should have their links updated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 742729] Review Request: php-pecl-mysqlnd-ms - A replication and load balancing plugin for mysqlnd
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=742729 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pa...@hubbitus.info AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|pa...@hubbitus.info Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #8 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2012-02-05 10:32:19 EST --- I take it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 --- Comment #10 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2012-02-05 09:29:12 EST --- Michel, thank you for willing review that - it very appreciated, but now there bundled libs stop issue. I have submitted it to upstream, but have no any response yet. P.S. Sorry for the previous buggy message. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 --- Comment #9 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2012-02-05 09:27:22 EST --- Michael, thank you for willing revкумц that - it very appreciated, but nor there bundled libs stop issue. I have submitted it to upstream, but have no any response yet. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 672221] Review Request: sqlite3-dbf - Converter of XBase / FoxPro tables to SQLite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=672221 Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) 2012-02-05 09:24:46 EST --- Thank you! I have fixed type. Thank you very much for the review! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: sqlite3-dbf Short Description: Converter of XBase / FoxPro tables to SQLite Owners: hubbitus Branches: F-16 F-16 F-17 EL-5 EL-6 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 784156] Review Request: uwsgi - Fast, self-healing, application container server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784156 Gal Hammer changed: What|Removed |Added CC||gham...@redhat.com --- Comment #5 from Gal Hammer 2012-02-05 07:56:05 EST --- I am not in the package reviewer group, but have provided this review as part of my sponsorship process. As a result, this notifies future reviewers that the review should be verified. $ rpmlint uwsgi.spec 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint uwsgi-1.0.2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US interprocess -> inter process, inter-process, intercessors uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preforking -> preforming, preferring uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US evented -> evened, vented, e vented uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US coroutine -> co routine, co-routine, routine uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US uGreen -> u Green, Green, green uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US xml -> XML, ml, x ml uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US ini -> uni, in, ii uwsgi.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US yaml -> yam, yams, yawl 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings. There are few more warning when running rpmlint on the uwsgi-*.rpm files. For example: uwsgi-plugin-common.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib64/uwsgi/cgi_plugin.so uwsgi-plugin-fastrouter.x86_64: W: no-documentation === I'm not sure about it. Do you need to run ldconfig in the %post section (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Shared_Libraries)? === That's it. For now. :-) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added CC||michel+...@sylvestre.me --- Comment #9 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 07:26:56 EST --- Is anyone officially reviewing this? 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 773470] Review Request: muffin - Window and compositing manager based on Clutter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=773470 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||771252 --- Comment #9 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 07:26:01 EST --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #4) > > > - query upstream about their tagging policy (the tag in git should perhaps > > be > > 3.2.1 not 1.0.0). > > Done > > https://github.com/linuxmint/muffin/issues/5 Thanks. At least going from 1.0.0 back to 3.2.1 is easier than the other way around (which would involve bumping epochs!). Since Cinnamon is itself version 1.x I have a feeling that upstream plans to eventually renumber the versions down, but it never hurts to ask (and nag them to fix their configure.ac declarations). I'm re-adding the blocker for cinnamon -- it's really for book-keeping and to avoid confusion (cf. Rahul's question on the cinnamon review discussion) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||773470 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 759747] Review Request: sk1libs - Universal vector graphics translator
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=759747 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|michel+...@sylvestre.me Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim 2012-02-05 07:21:18 EST --- Thanks. Taking the 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 784613] Review Request: python-auth-credential - abstraction of a credential
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784613 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|steve.tray...@cern.ch 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 784603] Review Request: python-messaging - abstraction of a "message"
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=784603 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Blocks|177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|steve.tray...@cern.ch Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Steve Traylen 2012-02-05 06:20:30 EST --- It's up to you if you want to do a python26 package on EPEL5 and also a python3 package on Fedora as well for that matter. There is no need to do a separate package for these and recommend to you don't in fact. As mentioned in #784613 you must do some informal reviews and provide a link to them here. Otherwise I am happy to sponsor you. Steve -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 251019] Review Request: lshw - Hardware lister
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=251019 Steve Traylen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||steve.tray...@cern.ch Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #21 from Steve Traylen 2012-02-05 06:13:14 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: lshw New Branches: el6 Owners: stevetraylen From #781486 Ok, great, I don't maintain EPEL branches for any 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 787459] New: Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787459 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: peter.bo...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme.spec SRPM URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework with smoking hot support for mobile and tablet devices using responsive design techniques. AT includes configurable responsive layouts, extensible theme settings and more features and baked in Drupal goodies than you can poke a stick at. Sub-themes can be extended in any way and can support any design. You'll never be trapped by an inflexible grid or hit a roadblock half way through your development. rpmlint output: $ rpmlint drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme.spec ../SRPMS/drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. koji output: Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3763624 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... 3763624 build (f16, drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm): open (x86-03.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 3763625 buildArch (drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-06.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 3763625 buildArch (drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-06.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 1 open 1 done 0 failed 3763624 build (f16, drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm): open (x86-03.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 0 open 2 done 0 failed 3763624 build (f16, drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme-2.1-1.fc16.src.rpm) completed successfully -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787459] Review Request: drupal7-theme-adaptivetheme - Adaptivetheme is a powerful theme framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787459 Peter Borsa changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787454] Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 7
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787454 Peter Borsa changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||662103(InsightReviews) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787454] New: Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 7
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 7 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787454 Summary: Review Request: drupal7-theme-ninesixty - 960 Grid System (960.gs) theme for Drupal 7 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: peter.bo...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-theme-ninesixty.spec SRPM URL: http://asrob.fedorapeople.org/SOURCES/drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: This theme is based on the 960 Grid System by Nathan Smith. NineSixty is a base theme with all the files provided by the 960 Grid System. From the sketch sheets to all the styles from the framework are included. There are a few modifications so it better fits into Drupal. All the details are inside the README.txt file. rpmlint output: $ rpmlint drupal7-theme-ninesixty.spec ../SRPMS/drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm ../RPMS/noarch/drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.noarch.rpm 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. koji output: Task info: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3763580 Watching tasks (this may be safely interrupted)... 3763580 build (f16, drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm): open (x86-03.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 3763581 buildArch (drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-18.phx2.fedoraproject.org) 3763581 buildArch (drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm, noarch): open (x86-18.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 1 open 1 done 0 failed 3763580 build (f16, drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm): open (x86-03.phx2.fedoraproject.org) -> closed 0 free 0 open 2 done 0 failed 3763580 build (f16, drupal7-theme-ninesixty-1.0-1.fc16.src.rpm) completed successfully -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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
--- Comment #12 from Gal Hammer 2012-02-05 04:06:40 EST ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> First, I can see a glaring issue with your package, you are shipping GDM's
> .src.rpm as part of your own source. That is probably not going to fly, even
> though I can't really find anything in the packaging guidelines that prevents
> you from doing it (closest would be
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#No_inclusion_of_pre-built_binaries_or_libraries
> but there's no mention about .src.rpm). I see some problems with your
> approach:
>
> - You are shipping a specific version of source that is already present in
> fedora
> - You will have to ship newer, static .src.rpm whenever GDM gets a newer
> version
> - You may end up fighting duplicated libraries
>
> The approach, in my opinion, would be to get in touch with the GDM packagers
> and ask for your stuff to be included if it's not already. It is not entirely
> apparent why requiring gdm-devel wouldn't work right now.
The reason I include the gdm src.rpm file is because I didn't find another way
to compile a gdm plugin outside the gdm's source tree. It is used only during
compilation and linkage time and it is not shipped with the plugin itself.
> [BLOCKER] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
> license - the COPYING file in the source tarball has GPLv3, you have GPLv2+ in
> the spec file
Fixed.
> [BLOCKER] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
> source,
> as provided in the spec URL - You should take a look at
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL#Using_Revision_Control and
> not use a self-hosted source tarball (Source0:
> http://ghammer.fedorapeople.org/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2)
As far as I understood this is allowed
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL).
> [BLOCKER] The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms on
> at least one primary architecture - I got this error when trying a mock build:
> xorg-x11-server-Xorg is needed by gdm-1:3.2.1.1-6.fc16.x86_64.
Probably a bug after fixes done after a review. I've updated a new version
(http://ghammer.fedorapeople.org/ovirt-guest-agent-1.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm) which
compile on both 32 and 64 bits.
> [BLOCKER] Each package must consistently use macros - I see a mix of $MACRO
> and
> %{macro}, use one style and stick with. Also, if you don't plan on supporting
> EPEL/RH, you should do away with the whole RPM_BUILD_ROOT [citation needed,
> maybe?]
I'm not sure I understand this. I checked with the gdm spec file (as an
example) and it look pretty much like mine (using %macro expect for
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
> Additionally, it seems you include some python code in there, so, using
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python as guide:
>
> [BLOCKER] To build a package containing python2 files, you need to have
> BuildRequires: python2-devel
Why do I need to include it? My build machine doesn't have the python2-devel
package installed.
> Some additional suggestions:
> - defattr is not needed anymore, if I recall
"The %files section normally begins with a %defattr line which sets the default
file permissions."
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_create_an_RPM_package).
Maybe it is time to review/update the manual... :-)
> - you should name your different targets appropriately like
> "ovirt-guest-agent-gdm-plugin" instead of just "gdm-plugin"
The rpmbuild does that for me. The rpm file name is called:
ovirt-guest-agent-gdm-plugin-1.0.1-1.fc16.x86_64.
> - in your %pre step, you add a user rhevagent if it doesn't exist, but you
> are
> also hardcoding the UID. You should leave that to the system to figure out and
> just use -r for system users
This is an assigned uid.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
