[Bug 790893] Review Request: ibus-hunspell-table - Predictive text using hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790893 --- Comment #4 from anish 2012-02-18 00:30:44 EST --- Thanks Daiki Ueno and Parag for review and comments -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794542] Review Request: dpsearch - DataparkSearch Engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794542
--- Comment #6 from Ricky Elrod 2012-02-17 21:37:18 EST ---
Disabled openssl for now, will poke upstream and ask about them making an
exception for it.
http://codeblock.fedorapeople.org/dpsearch/dpsearch-4.54-0.1.20120215snap.fc18.src.rpm
and
http://codeblock.fedorapeople.org/dpsearch/dpsearch.spec
Should be better. Fixed everything except the man pages thing for now, I can
take a look at that, but there is a lot of html documentation that gets thrown
in %{_defaultdocdir}/%{name}-%{version}.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794946] New: XmlSchema - Light weight schema object model
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: XmlSchema - Light weight schema object model https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794946 Summary: XmlSchema - Light weight schema object model Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: agr...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Name: XmlSchema Version : 1.4.7 License : ASL 2.0 URL : http://ws.apache.org/commons/XmlSchema Summary : Lightweight schema object model Description : Commons XMLSchema is a lightweight schema object model that can be used to manipulate or generate a schema. SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/XmlSchema.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/XmlSchema-1.4.7-1.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 794946] XmlSchema - Lightweight schema object model
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794946 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) Summary|XmlSchema - Light weight|XmlSchema - Lightweight |schema object model |schema object model -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 588406] Review Request: rubygem-buildr - Ruby Based build system that uses Maven style repositories
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588406 Bug 588406 depends on bug 588428, which changed state. Bug 588428 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-addressable - Improved URI/URL handling https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588428 What|Old Value |New Value Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 588428] Review Request: rubygem-addressable - Improved URI/URL handling
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=588428 Shawn Starr changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed|2010-11-18 09:52:46 |2012-02-17 20:46:14 --- Comment #31 from Shawn Starr 2012-02-17 20:46:14 EST --- This is pushed into f17 and rawhide 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 --- Comment #16 from leigh scott 2012-02-17 20:43:36 EST --- (In reply to comment #15) > Do it for Fedora 17 as well and meanwhile I will try a Fedora 16 scratch build I've had issues with F17 https://github.com/linuxmint/Cinnamon/issues/279 Override for F17 added -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 #15 from Rahul Sundaram 2012-02-17 20:24:05 EST --- Do it for Fedora 17 as well and meanwhile I will try a Fedora 16 scratch 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 794941] New: Review Request: neethi - Web Services Policy 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: neethi - Web Services Policy framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794941 Summary: Review Request: neethi - Web Services Policy framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: agr...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Name: neethi Version : 3.0.1 License : ASL 2.0 URL : http://ws.apache.org/neethi/ Summary : Web Services Policy framework Description : Apache Neethi provides general framework for the programmers to use WS Policy. It is compliant with latest WS Policy specification which was published in March 2006. This framework is specifically written to enable the Apache Web services stack to use WS Policy as a way of expressing it's requirements and capabilities. SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/neethi.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/neethi-3.0.1-1.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 794941] Review Request: neethi - Web Services Policy 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=794941 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) Depends on||791053 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791053] Review Request: axiom - Axis Object Model
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791053 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||794941 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791053] Review Request: axiom - Axis Object Model
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791053 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: axiom - |ws-commons-axiom - AXIOM|Axis Object Model |XML info-set model for | |Apache Axis2| --- Comment #1 from Andy Grimm 2012-02-17 19:46:21 EST --- UPDATED (name changed from 'ws-commons-axiom' to simply 'axiom'): Name: axiom Version : 1.2.12 License : ASL 2.0 URL : http://ws.apache.org/commons/axiom/ Summary : Axis Object Model Description : AXIOM stands for AXis Object Model (also known as OM - Object Model) and refers to the XML info-set model that was initially developed for Apache Axis2. SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/axiom.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/axiom-1.2.12-1.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 735225] Review Request: axis2c - Web services engine implemented 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=735225 --- Comment #7 from Garrett Holmstrom 2012-02-17 18:59:03 EST --- I share your disgust. It dlopens modules based on the contents of the particular application's configuration file. Failure to include the plain .so files results in nasty errors like this one: [error] class_loader.c(162) Loading shared library /usr/lib64/axis2c/lib/libaxis2_http_sender.so Failed. DLERROR IS /usr/lib64/axis2c/lib/libaxis2_http_sender.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory [error] conf_builder.c(903) Transport sender is NULL for transport http, unable to continue [error] conf_builder.c(262) Processing transport senders failed, unable to continue [error] dep_engine.c(752) Populating Axis2 Configuration failed [error] conf_init.c(64) Loading deployment engine failed for repository /usr/lib64/axis2c. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||globus-gram-audit-3.1-3.fc1 ||5 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-17 18:51:58 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 18:51:58 EST --- globus-gram-audit-3.1-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790984] Review Request: python-mwlib-xhtml - XHTML writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790984 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 18:51:46 EST --- python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc16, python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.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 790985] Review Request: python-mwlib-docbook - DocBook writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790985 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 18:51:52 EST --- python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc16, python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.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 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|globus-gram-audit-3.1-3.fc1 |globus-gram-audit-3.1-3.fc1 |5 |6 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 18:52:32 EST --- globus-gram-audit-3.1-3.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 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 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||php-pecl-mysqlnd-ms-1.2.2-1 ||.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-17 18:48:20 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 18:48:20 EST --- php-pecl-mysqlnd-ms-1.2.2-1.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 786668] Review Request: python-sqlite3dbm - SQLite-backed dictionary conforming to the dbm interface
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786668 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-sqlite3dbm-0.1.4-2.f ||c16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-17 18:50:27 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 18:50:27 EST --- python-sqlite3dbm-0.1.4-2.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 787878] Review Request: mingw-icu - MinGW compilation of International Components for Unicode 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=787878 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-icu-4.8.1.1-2.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-17 18:48:43 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 18:48:43 EST --- mingw-icu-4.8.1.1-2.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 788080] Review Request: python-xhtml2pdf - HTML/CSS to PDF converter based on 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=788080
--- Comment #4 from Brendan Jones 2012-02-17
18:46:12 EST ---
Looking good - just a couple of things. I've done the formal review, but just
need to run these by you.
1. rpmlint on the built package:
python-xhtml2pdf.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-html5lib
python-xhtml2pdf.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2
Can you remove these?
2. Just for completeness use your %{pkgname} var in the %files section
3. Build is failing on koji in the %test section:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3800044 - it is try to pull
down the reportlab egg
4. Just a note: it seems to be bundling some of the reportlab source.
/usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/reportlab/platypus/paragraph.py
vs.
xhtml2pdf/reportlab_paragraph.py
However it seems that this has been heavily modified, quite well annotated and
doesn't breach the reportlab license (BSD) so no blocker.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 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 #14 from leigh scott 2012-02-17 18:34:43 EST --- Hi Rahul, Thank you for taking the review I built muffin 1.0.1 earlier today. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-1939/muffin-1.0.1-1.fc16? I have also added a buildroot override for muffin 1.0.1 for the F16 branch so it's available now. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=300162 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787738] Review Request: wss4j - Apache WS-Security implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787738 Garrett Holmstrom changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||gho...@fedoraproject.org AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|gho...@fedoraproject.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Garrett Holmstrom 2012-02-17 18:34:13 EST --- I presume you chose version 1.5 over 1.6 so you could patch out the opensaml dependency. Any idea how long 1.5 will have upstream support? The spec file has only a few minor issues: - ™ must not appear in package descriptions - Patch entries in the spec file need descriptive comments - The java dep must be versioned per the java guidelines - You need to add post and postun deps on jpackage-utils per the java guidelines Just fix those and you should be good to go. Note that you won't be able to build for EPEL 5 with this spec file if that matters to you. An exhaustive review follows. Mandatory review guidelines: ok - rpmlint output (none) ok - Package meets naming guidelines ok - Spec file name matches base package name ok - License is acceptable (ASL 2.0) ok - License field in spec is correct ok - License files included in package %docs or not included in upstream source ok - License files installed when any subpackage combination is installed ok - Spec written in American English ok - Spec is legible ok - Sources match upstream unless altered to fix permissibility issues Upstream MD5: 7f0029d960a140b5054a3c339259daac wss4j-src-1.5.12.zip Your MD5: 7f0029d960a140b5054a3c339259daac wss4j-src-1.5.12.zip ok - Build succeeds on at least one supported platform -- - Build succeeds on all supported platforms or has ExcludeArch + bugs filed ok - BuildRequires correct -- - Package handles locales with %find_lang -- - %post, %postun call ldconfig if package contains shared .so files ok - No bundled system libs -- - Relocatability is justified ok - Package owns all directories it creates ok - Package requires other packages for directories it uses but does not own ok - No duplicate files in %files unless necessary for license files ok - File permissions are sane -- - Each %files section contains %defattr on EL4 ok - Consistent use of macros ok - Sources contain only permissible code or content -- - Large documentation files go in -doc package ok - Missing %doc files do not affect runtime -- - Headers go in -devel package -- - Static libs go in -static package -- - Unversioned .so files go in -devel package -- - Devel packages require base with fully-versioned dependency ok - Package contains no .la files -- - GUI app uses desktop-file-install/desktop-file-validate for .desktop files -- - Package's files and directories don't conflict with others' or justified ok - File names are valid UTF-8 Optional review guidelines: -- - Query upstream about including license files no - Translations of description, Summary ok - Builds in mock ok - Builds on all supported platforms -- - Scriptlets are sane -- - Non-devel subpackage Requires are sane -- - .pc files go in -devel unless main package is a development tool ok - No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin -- - Man pages included for all executables -- - Package with test-suite executes it in %check section Packaging guidelines: ok - Has dist tag ok - Useful without external bits ok - Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir, /usr/target, /run ok - No files in /bin, /sbin, /lib* on >= F17 -- - Programs launched before FS mounting use /run instead of /var/run -- - Binaries in /bin, /sbin do not depend on files in /usr on < F17 ok - Changelog in prescribed format ok - Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags -- - Correct BuildRoot tag on < F10/EL6 Builds will not work on EPEL 5. -- - Correct %clean section on < F13/EL6 Builds will not work on EPEL 5. NO - Requires correct, justified where necessary Java guideline violation; see below NO - Summary, description do not use trademarks incorrectly Remove ™ from the package description. ok - All relevant documentation is packaged, tagged appropriately ok - Documentation files do not have executable permissions -- - %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise -- - Package with .pc files Requires pkgconfig on < EL6 -- - Useful -debuginfo package or disabled and justified ok - No static executables ok - Rpath absent or only used for internal libs -- - Config files marked with %config -- - %config files marked noreplace or justified ok - No %config files under /usr -- - Systemd units/init scripts are sane -- - Spec uses macros instead of hard-coded directory names where appropriate ok - Spe
[Bug 785923] Review Request: xgap - GUI for GAP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785923 --- Comment #6 from Jerry James 2012-02-17 18:09:00 EST --- (In reply to comment #4) > The desktop file has a number of flaws. I therefore attached a modified copy. Thank you. > - Don't hardcode icons; I also wonder why this package has no icon but there > is > an icon and a copy of this desktop file in gap-core, which is no desktop > application, as far as I can see. The icon comes with the GAP upstream distribution. The desktop file for GAP comes from Debian. It works, too, due to the "Terminal=true" in the GAP desktop file. Since this package is just an X Windows wrapper for GAP, it doesn't have its own icon, but borrows GAP's. However, it needs a different desktop file since it should have "Terminal=false" and a different executable name. > - Is there really a MIME type? If so, you need a scriptlet. The MIME type is defined by the gap-core package. The main GAP executable is already registered for that mime type, so this desktop file gives users a second choice of program to use to open such files. > - Would you really execute xgap handing over a list of URLs? (%U) Eek. No, that should be %f. Thanks for catching that. > - "Comment" is shown as context help for the application and should give the > user a clue what that program does. You don't need a comment, but the original > comment is not suitable. Thanks, I've adopted your suggestion for this. > Please use the name macro consistently. You're using it on some occasions, but > not on others, e. g. patch0. Fixed. > Please always change the release number and write to the changelog. The > reviewer otherwise can easily miss out changes. Sorry, I usually do that, but got into too much of a rush with this update and forgot until I had already uploaded the packages. It won't happen again. > I wonder if everything installed in /usr/share/gap/pkg/xgap is really > necessary, for instance manual.dvi, manual.tex or Makefile. The same is true > for other gap packages. You might also consider to install the necessary files > with the doc macro and leave a link. When I was working on the main GAP package, I tried dropping various files out of doc. No matter what I omitted, it made some part of the internal document viewer stop working. Even the source files are used, by an internal indexer. Even the READMEs are used, by an internal README viewer! I couldn't find anything that I could leave out without breaking something, so I gave up and left them all in. The same seems to be true for the GAP packages. I'll experiment with using %doc and a link. It makes me a little nervous, I'll admit, since my other experiments worked out so badly, but I'll try. Minus using %doc, all the other changes you requested are here: Spec URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/xgap/xgap.spec SRPM URL: http://jjames.fedorapeople.org/xgap/xgap-4.21-2.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 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 #13 from Rahul Sundaram 2012-02-17 17:58:35 EST --- Please build and push muffin into the repository. I am not able do a scratch build locally because of what appears to be a yum bug (already filed) and I cannot do a scratch build via koji because muffin-devel doesn't exist in the repository yet. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=3800032&name=root.log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794783] Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783 --- Comment #6 from Xavier Bachelot 2012-02-17 17:48:22 EST --- Ok, so to summarize, please fix the missing BuildRequires and the following 3 rpmlint issues : - description line too long - mixed use of spaces and tabs - incoherent version in changelog then this package will be approved. Thanks for releasing and packaging the modesetting driver, it will help us with the port of openchrome to KMS. James Simmons told me this afternoon he got a couple patches he cooked along the way to send you for this driver. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on 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 Rahul Sundaram changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|methe...@gmail.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 782560] Review Request: rubygem-ruby-shadow - *nix Shadow Password Module
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782560 --- Comment #14 from Todd Zullinger 2012-02-17 17:40:58 EST --- I updated the spec file to do prep/build/install more in line with the draft guidelines (minus the typos in the draft that make it fail). I gave up on el5, as rubygems there is a bit too old. but this should work on el6 and any supported fedora releases. If we could update rubygems just a little on el5, it'd work there too. Spec file: http://tmz.fedorapeople.org/specs/rubygem-ruby-shadow.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 794783] Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783
--- Comment #5 from Xavier Bachelot 2012-02-17 17:39:18
EST ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
C/C++
[x]: MUST Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: MUST Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: MUST Package contains no static executables.
[x]: MUST Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: MUST Package is not relocatable.
[x]: MUST Development .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-0.1.0-1.fc18.i686.rpm :
/usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/modesetting_drv.so
Not a shared object, this is an X driver.
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 primary architecture.
[!]: 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 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 xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-debuginfo-0.1.0-1.fc18.i686.rpm
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-debuginfo.i686: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.x.org
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-0.1.0-1.fc18.i686.rpm
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
unaccelerated -> accelerated, unadulterated, accelerate
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.i686: E: description-line-too-long C X.Org X11
modesetting video driver - basic modesetting fallback driver, for use for
simple scenarios and unaccelerated systems.
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.i686: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1.0-0
['0.1.0-1.fc18', '0.1.0-1']
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.i686: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.x.org
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings.
rpmlint xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-0.1.0-1.fc18.src.rpm
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US
unaccelerated -> accelerated, unadulterated, accelerate
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.src: E: description-line-too-long C X.Org X11
modesetting video driver - basic modesetting fallback driver, for use for
simple scenarios and unaccelerated systems.
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.x.org
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.src:6: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line
6, tab: line 3)
xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
ftp://ftp.x.org/pub/individual/driver/xf86-video-modesetting-0.1.0.tar.bz2
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/tmp/xf86-video-modesetting-0.1.0.tar
[Bug 794923] New: Review Request: stax-utils - StAX utility classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: stax-utils - StAX utility classes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794923 Summary: Review Request: stax-utils - StAX utility classes Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: agr...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Name: stax-utils Version : 20110309 Group : Development/Libraries License : BSD URL : http://java.net/projects/stax-utils/ Summary : StAX utility classes Description : This is a set of utility classes that make it easy for developers to integrate StAX into their existing XML processing applications. SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/stax-utils.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/stax-utils-20110309-1.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 794923] Review Request: stax-utils - StAX utility classes
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794923 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183(FE-JAVASIG) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794783] Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|xav...@bachelot.org Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #4 from Xavier Bachelot 2012-02-17 16:56:23 EST --- There are a couple missing BuildRequires: BuildRequires: libX11-devel BuildRequires: libdrm-devel BuildRequires: libXext-devel Also, there are a rpmlint warnings that need fixing, I've stripped the irrelevant ones : xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.src:6: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 6, tab: line 3) xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.1.0-0 ['0.1.0-1.fc17', '0.1.0-1'] Not a big deal, but you should add a changelog entry and bump the release each time you make changes to the spec. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794783] Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783 --- Comment #3 from Dave Airlie 2012-02-17 16:36:24 EST --- thanks Xavier, I've uploaded a new version of the spec to the same place, addressing most of the comments The only one I didn't do is file a bug for ExcludeArch, all xorg drivers exclude s390, and its not really specific to one 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 786213] Review Request: trac-agilo-plugin - A plugin for supporting the Scrum process in Trac
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786213 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi 2012-02-17 16:23:55 EST --- Before I start in on the review here, could you update to the latest upstream? agilo-0.9.6.2 seems to be the current version. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785785] Review Request: pkgdiff - A tool for analyzing changes in Linux software packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785785 Richard Shaw changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #20 from Richard Shaw 2012-02-17 16:10:36 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: pkgdiff Short Description: A tool for analyzing changes in Linux software packages Owners: hobbes1069 Branches: f16 f17 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 789249] Review Request: jkmeter - Horizontal or vertical bar-graph audio levels meter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789249 --- Comment #4 from Brendan Jones 2012-02-17 15:46:29 EST --- Thanks for the review. Upstream has been notified about the incorrect FSF addresses. Apologies for the missing build requires: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3799891 SRPM: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/jkmeter-0.6.1-4.fc16.src.rpm SPEC: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/jkmeter.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 794715] Review Request: commons-ognl - Object Graph Navigation 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=794715 Andy Grimm changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: ognl - |Review Request: |Object Graph Navigation |commons-ognl - Object Graph |Library |Navigation Library -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794715] Review Request: ognl - Object Graph Navigation 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=794715 --- Comment #4 from Andy Grimm 2012-02-17 15:36:12 EST --- Name: commons-ognl Version : 3.0.2 License : ASL 2.0 URL : http://commons.apache.org/ognl/ Summary : Object Graph Navigation Library Description : OGNL is an expression language for getting and setting properties of Java objects, plus other extras such as list projection and selection and lambda expressions. SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/commons-ognl.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/commons-ognl-3.0.2-1.fc17.src.rpm Again, note that I've versioned this package as "3.0.2" because it is essentially the 3.0.2 code with an ASL 2.0 license and a move to the org.apache.commons namespace. I think that calling it by the in-tree version at the time, i.e. "4.0-incubating-SNAPSHOT", would be less clear. I'm open to discussion on this, though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 788080] Review Request: python-xhtml2pdf - HTML/CSS to PDF converter based on 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=788080 Brendan Jones changed: What|Removed |Added CC||brendan.jones...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|brendan.jones...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Brendan Jones 2012-02-17 15:21:57 EST --- I will take this 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 790525] Review Request: rubygem-dynect_rest - Dynect REST API 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=790525 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 15:06:18 EST --- rubygem-dynect_rest-0.4.0-3.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 789249] Review Request: jkmeter - Horizontal or vertical bar-graph audio levels meter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789249 --- Comment #3 from Matthias Runge 2012-02-17 14:55:24 EST --- One small note: [mrunge@mrungexp jkmeter-0.6.1]$ licensecheck * source/global.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/png2img.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/jclient.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/kmeter.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/stcorrdsp.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/mainwin.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/png2img.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/stcorrdsp.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/jclient.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/styles.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/mainwin.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/jkmeter.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/cmeter.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/cmeter.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/kmeterdsp.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/styles.cc: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/kmeter.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) source/kmeterdsp.h: GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address) Build in mock fails with: g++ -O2 -Wall -MMD -MP -DVERSION=\"0.6.1\" -DSHARED=\"/usr/share/jkmeter\" -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i686 -mtune=atom -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -I/usr/include/freetype2 -c -o jclient.o jclient.cc jclient.cc:23:21: fatal error: sndfile.h: No such file or directory compilation terminated. make: *** [jclient.o] Error 1 looks like a missing dependency (not listed dep) Could you try to fix the build? 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 789249] Review Request: jkmeter - Horizontal or vertical bar-graph audio levels meter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789249 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mru...@matthias-runge.de -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 789249] Review Request: jkmeter - Horizontal or vertical bar-graph audio levels meter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789249 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mru...@matthias-runge.de Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge 2012-02-17 14:50:12 EST --- I'm taking this one -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785785] Review Request: pkgdiff - A tool for analyzing changes in Linux software packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785785 Matthias Runge changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #19 from Matthias Runge 2012-02-17 14:27:50 EST --- looks fine to me, no issues found. 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 786093] Review Request: python-windmill - A web application testing 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=786093 --- Comment #1 from Volker Fröhlich 2012-02-17 14:20:52 EST --- A little warning: I tried to use Windmill 1.6 and I found it not running properly. https://github.com/windmill/windmill/issues/82 I think you should Require pyOpenSSL to allow for https. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794783] Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783 --- Comment #2 from Xavier Bachelot 2012-02-17 14:18:32 EST --- you must add the README and COPYING files to %doc -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794783] Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783 Xavier Bachelot changed: What|Removed |Added CC||xav...@bachelot.org --- Comment #1 from Xavier Bachelot 2012-02-17 13:43:30 EST --- You should use %global rather than %define See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25global_preferred_over_.25define Unless you plan on submitting this for el5, you can remove 'rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT' at top of %install section, the whole %clean section and the %defattr in the %files section. The BuildRoot can be removed too. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag The %description could probably be a bit more helpful. You need to file a bug explaining the ExcludeArch. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Architecture_Support Apart from that, the spec file looks good. I will build it and check some more stuff after that. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 734531] Review Request: unison240 - File synchronisation 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=734531 Gregor Tätzner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-17 13:39:51 --- Comment #25 from Gregor Tätzner 2012-02-17 13:39:51 EST --- pushed to stable -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 760033] Review Request: kde-plasma-publictransport - Public Transport plasma applet
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=760033 Gregor Tätzner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-02-17 13:40:55 --- Comment #18 from Gregor Tätzner 2012-02-17 13:40:55 EST --- pushed to stable -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794542] Review Request: dpsearch - DataparkSearch Engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794542 --- Comment #4 from Ricky Elrod 2012-02-17 13:28:40 EST --- I actually already fixed most of those, just forgot to upload the new srpm (the specfile was right). Done: http://codeblock.fedorapeople.org/dpsearch/dpsearch-4.54.20120215snap-1.fc18.src.rpm I looked at using %configure and it was a bit more difficult - they tend to clutter some directories that shouldn't be cluttered, by default. I can look into managing that and using %configure and overriding the 2-3 flags to fix those locations, if it's a review-breaker, though. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794542] Review Request: dpsearch - DataparkSearch Engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794542
--- Comment #3 from Kevin Fenzi 2012-02-17 13:15:07 EST ---
This is a snapshot?
Can you update it based on:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages
ie, change versioning and include a comment with how the checkout was made (or
include a script to generate it).
You may also want to try building with 'make %{?_smp_mflags}' and using
'%configure' macro instead of ./configure. ;)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 784592] Review Request: jpf - Java Plug-in 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=784592 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 13:03:23 EST --- jpf-1.5.1-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 790985] Review Request: python-mwlib-docbook - DocBook writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790985 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 12:51:38 EST --- python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc17,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc17,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790984] Review Request: python-mwlib-xhtml - XHTML writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790984 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 12:51:33 EST --- python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc17,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc17,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.fc17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790985] Review Request: python-mwlib-docbook - DocBook writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790985 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 12:51:23 EST --- python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc16,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc16,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.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 790984] Review Request: python-mwlib-xhtml - XHTML writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790984 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System 2012-02-17 12:51:18 EST --- python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc16,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-mwlib-xhtml-0.1.0-3.fc16,python-mwlib-docbook-0.1.0-3.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 790985] Review Request: python-mwlib-docbook - DocBook writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790985 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790984] Review Request: python-mwlib-xhtml - XHTML writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790984 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 735225] Review Request: axis2c - Web services engine implemented 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=735225 --- Comment #6 from Tom "spot" Callaway 2012-02-17 12:27:54 EST --- It dlopens ALL of them? Even the ones in /usr/lib64 ? Ignoring how awful that is, please just confirm 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 791229] Review Request: authhub - OTP support for MIT Kerberos
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791229 Kashyap Chamarthy changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|kcham...@redhat.com --- Comment #8 from Kashyap Chamarthy 2012-02-17 12:11:19 EST --- (In reply to comment #7) > Git done (by process-git-requests). > > Removed f18, ==devel. Kashyap, please take ownership of review BZs. Done. Sorry, missed to do that. > Thanks! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794793] New: Review Request: openssl-ibmpkcs11 - An openssl PKCS#11 engine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: openssl-ibmpkcs11 - An openssl PKCS#11 engine https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794793 Summary: Review Request: openssl-ibmpkcs11 - An openssl PKCS#11 engine Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: k...@linux.vnet.ibm.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://kyoder.users.sourceforge.net/openssl-ibmpkcs11.spec SRPM URL: http://kyoder.users.sourceforge.net/openssl-ibmpkcs11-1.0.0-0.src.rpm Description: This package contains a shared object OpenSSL dynamic engine for the use with a PKCS#11 implementation such as openCryptoki. This package provides a library that will bridge the gap between a PKCS#11 implementation, which provides support for storage of keys and certificates and cryptographic hardware support, to the openssl libcrypto library. Testing: 1. Install openCryptoki: # rpm -ivh opencryptoki-2.3.3-2.fc15.i686.rpm opencryptoki-libs-2.3.3-2.fc15.i686.rpm opencryptoki-swtok-2.3.3-2.fc15.i686.rpm 2. Configure openCryptoki: # /etc/init.d/pkcsslotd start [root@localhost ~]# pkcsconf -t Token #0 Info: Label: IBM OS PKCS#11 Manufacturer: IBM Corp. Model: IBM SoftTok Serial Number: 123 Flags: 0x880045 (RNG|LOGIN_REQUIRED|CLOCK_ON_TOKEN|USER_PIN_TO_BE_CHANGED|SO_PIN_TO_BE_CHANGED) Sessions: -1/-1 R/W Sessions: -1/-1 PIN Length: 4-8 Public Memory: 0x/0x Private Memory: 0x/0x Hardware Version: 1.0 Firmware Version: 1.0 Time: 10:01:00 AM [root@localhost ~]# pkcsconf -I -c 0 Enter the SO PIN: # (default is 87654321) Enter a unique token label: kentinit [root@localhost ~]# pkcsconf -P -c 0 Enter the SO PIN: Enter the new SO PIN: Re-enter the new SO PIN: [root@localhost ~]# pkcsconf -u -c 0 Enter the SO PIN: Enter the new user PIN: Re-enter the new user PIN: [root@localhost ~]# pkcsconf -t Token #0 Info: Label: kentinit Manufacturer: IBM Corp. Model: IBM SoftTok Serial Number: 123 Flags: 0x44D (RNG|LOGIN_REQUIRED|USER_PIN_INITIALIZED|CLOCK_ON_TOKEN|TOKEN_INITIALIZED) Sessions: -1/-1 R/W Sessions: -1/-1 PIN Length: 4-8 Public Memory: 0x/0x Private Memory: 0x/0x Hardware Version: 1.0 Firmware Version: 1.0 Time: 10:01:44 AM 3. Point openssl at the new engine: [root@localhost ~]# openssl engine -t (aesni) Intel AES-NI engine (no-aesni) [ available ] (dynamic) Dynamic engine loading support [ unavailable ] [root@localhost ~]# OPENSSL_CONF=/usr/share/doc/openssl-ibmpkcs11-1.0.0/openssl.cnf.sample openssl engine -t (aesni) Intel AES-NI engine (no-aesni) [ available ] (dynamic) Dynamic engine loading support [ unavailable ] (ibmpkcs11) PKCS#11 hardware engine support [ available ] 4. Run an openssl speed test using the engine: [root@localhost ~]# OPENSSL_CONF=/usr/share/doc/openssl-ibmpkcs11-1.0.0/openssl.cnf.sample openssl engine -c (aesni) Intel AES-NI engine (no-aesni) (dynamic) Dynamic engine loading support (ibmpkcs11) PKCS#11 hardware engine support [RSA, RAND, DES-ECB, DES-CBC, DES-EDE3, DES-EDE3-CBC, AES-128-ECB, AES-128-CBC, AES-192-ECB, AES-192-CBC, AES-256-ECB, AES-256-CBC, MD5, SHA1, RSA-SHA1, hmacWithSHA1] [root@localhost ~]# OPENSSL_CONF=/usr/share/doc/openssl-ibmpkcs11-1.0.0/openssl.cnf.sample openssl speed -engine ibmpkcs11 -evp des-ecb engine "ibmpkcs11" set. Doing des-ecb for 3s on 16 size blocks: 3601074 des-ecb's in 2.97s Doing des-ecb for 3s on 64 size blocks: 1724899 des-ecb's in 2.97s Doing des-ecb for 3s on 256 size blocks: 545990 des-ecb's in 2.90s Doing des-ecb for 3s on 1024 size blocks: 156847 des-ecb's in 2.97s Doing des-ecb for 3s on 8192 size blocks: 19434 des-ecb's in 2.97s OpenSSL 1.0.0e-fips 6 Sep 2011 built on: Wed Sep 7 18:44:05 UTC 2011 options:bn(64,32) md2(int) rc4(8x,mmx) des(ptr,risc1,16,long) aes(partial) blowfish(idx) compiler: gcc -fPIC -DOPENSSL_PIC -DZLIB -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -DKRB5_MIT -DL_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -Wall -O2 -g -pipe -Wall -Wp,-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -fexceptions -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -m32 -march=i686 -mtune=atom -fasynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_PART_WORDS -DOPENSSL_IA32_SSE2 -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256
[Bug 735225] Review Request: axis2c - Web services engine implemented 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=735225 --- Comment #5 from Garrett Holmstrom 2012-02-17 11:32:06 EST --- Unfortunately axis2c dlopens the plain .so files, forcing the main package to contain the -devel symlinks. Is there something I could do with the spec file's commentary to make that more clear? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 757156] Review Request: perl-Env-C - Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757156 --- Comment #16 from Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak 2012-02-17 11:29:35 EST --- Oh, well. I have received an e-mail that I have been sponsored, and the following text: > Thank you for applying for the packager group. > > Welcome to the Fedora packager group. Please continue the process from: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers > /Join#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner Which is what I have been trying to follow today. If this is not the correct procedure, anybody care to enlighten me what am I missing? 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 794783] New: Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794783 Summary: Review Request: xorg-x11-drv-modesetting - X.org modesetting fallback driver Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: airl...@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.fedoraproject.org/~airlied/modesetting/xorg-x11-drv-modesetting.spec SRPM URL: http://people.fedoraproject.org/~airlied/modesetting/xorg-x11-drv-modesetting-0.1.0-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: X.org modesetting fallback driver. Simple driver to be used in fallback situations. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 754023] Review Request: mumpot - GTK mapping application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754023 Volker Fröhlich changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: Mumpot -|Review Request: mumpot - |GTK mapping application |GTK mapping 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 791229] Review Request: authhub - OTP support for MIT Kerberos
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791229 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 11:05:50 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). Removed f18, ==devel. Kashyap, please take ownership of review BZs. 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 754023] Review Request: Mumpot - GTK mapping application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754023
--- Comment #6 from Jerry James 2012-02-17 11:04:16 EST
---
I think that mumpot-0.6-fprint.patch is not quite right. I see these warnings
on an i386 build:
osm_parse.c: In function 'mem_stats':
osm_parse.c:1063:69: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long
unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'unsigned int' [-Wformat]
osm_parse.c:1079:68: warning: format '%lu' expects argument of type 'long
unsigned int', but argument 3 has type 'unsigned int' [-Wformat]
Other compiler warnings that should be looked at (I have not checked whether
they represent actual problems or not):
png_io.c: In function 'load_gfxfile':
png_io.c:190:16: warning: passing argument 3 of 'png_get_IHDR' from
incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
In file included from png_io.c:17:0:
/usr/include/libpng15/png.h:2153:22: note: expected 'png_uint_32 *' but
argument is of type 'long unsigned int *'
png_io.c:190:16: warning: passing argument 4 of 'png_get_IHDR' from
incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
In file included from png_io.c:17:0:
/usr/include/libpng15/png.h:2153:22: note: expected 'png_uint_32 *' but
argument is of type 'long unsigned int *'
get_maprect.c: In function 'main':
get_maprect.c:139:10: warning: 'height' may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
get_maprect.c:139:10: warning: 'width' may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
get_maprect.c:132:26: warning: 'yoffset' may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
get_maprect.c:139:28: warning: 'xoffset' may be used uninitialized in this
function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized]
The SVG icon is stored in the wrong place. There is no such thing as
%{_datadir}/application/pixmaps in Fedora (check with repoquery). There is
%{_datadir}/pixmaps, but %{_datadir}/icons/hicolor/scalable/apps is preferred.
If you store the icon in the latter, also Require hicolor-icon-theme and see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache. See the
thread starting here:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2012-January/161076.html.
Also, you may need to change "Mumpot" to "mumpot" in the name of this bug
before an SCM request will be acted on. I seem to remember differing
capitalization causing a problem with a previous review I did.
+: OK
-: must be fixed
=: should be fixed (at your discretion)
N: not applicable
MUST:
[+] rpmlint output:
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[+] follows package naming guidelines
[+] spec file base name matches package name
[=] package meets the packaging guidelines
You SHOULD include more information about the upstream status of your patches:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#All_patches_should_have_an_upstream_bug_link_or_comment
Consider preserving the timestamp on the manpage whose encoding is changed
(https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Timestamps). For example:
iconv -f iso8859-1 -t utf-8 doc/get_maprect.1 > doc/get_maprect.1.conv
touch -r doc/get_maprect.1 doc/get_maprect.1.conv
mv doc/get_maprect.1.conv doc/get_maprect.1
[+] package uses a Fedora approved license
[+] license field matches the actual license
[+] license file is included in %doc
[+] spec file is in American English
[+] spec file is legible
[+] sources match upstream: md5sum is 9a0409c39e49c45cea3160c7ec7fe976 for both
[+] package builds on at least one primary arch (tried x86_64)
[N] appropriate use of ExcludeArch
[+] all build requirements in BuildRequires:
[+] spec file handles locales properly
[N] ldconfig in %post and %postun
[+] no bundled copies of system libraries
[+] no relocatable packages
[-] package owns all directories that it creates:
/usr/share/application/pixmaps is created but not owned; see the icon
discussion above
[+] no files listed twice in %files
[+] proper permissions on files
[+] consistent use of macros
[+] code or permissible content
[N] large documentation in -doc
[+] no runtime dependencies in %doc
[N] header files in -devel
[N] static libraries in -static
[N] .so in -devel
[N] -devel requires main package
[+] package contains no libtool archives
[+] package contains a desktop file, uses desktop-file-install/-validate
[+] package does not own files/dirs owned by other packages
[+] all filenames in UTF-8
SHOULD:
[N] query upstream for license text
[N] description and summary contain available translations
[+] package builds in mock: tried fedora-rawhide-i386
[+] package builds on all supported arches: tried i386 and x86_64
[+] package functions as described: light testing only
[+] sane scriptlets
[N] subpackages require the main package
[N] placement of pkgconfig files
[N] file dependencies versus package dependencies
[+] package contains man pages for binaries/scripts
--
Configure bugmail: https://bug
[Bug 791229] Review Request: authhub - OTP support for MIT Kerberos
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791229 Nathaniel McCallum changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Nathaniel McCallum 2012-02-17 10:58:02 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: authhub Short Description: OTP support for MIT Kerberos Owners: npmccallum Branches: f17 f18 master 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 791229] Review Request: authhub - OTP support for MIT Kerberos
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791229 Kashyap Chamarthy changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Kashyap Chamarthy 2012-02-17 10:51:45 EST --- Package Approved per above comments. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791229] Review Request: authhub - OTP support for MIT Kerberos
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791229 --- Comment #4 from Kashyap Chamarthy 2012-02-17 10:49:35 EST --- Builds fine: [build@dhcp201-157 SPECS]$ tail build-authhub.stdout2 Wrote: /home/build/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/authhub-totp-0.1.1-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm Wrote: /home/build/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/authhub-httpbasicauth-0.1.1-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm Wrote: /home/build/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/authhub-yubikey-0.1.1-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm Wrote: /home/build/rpmbuild/RPMS/x86_64/authhub-debuginfo-0.1.1-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm Executing(%clean): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.VV6lRB + umask 022 + cd /home/build/rpmbuild/BUILD + cd authhub-0.1.1 + /usr/bin/rm -rf /home/build/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/authhub-0.1.1-1.fc18.x86_64 + exit 0 Installs fine: [build@dhcp201-157 x86_64]$ sudo rpm -ivh python-authhub-0.1.1-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm authhub-* Preparing...### [100%] 1:authhub### [ 14%] 2:python-authhub ### [ 29%] 3:authhub-httpbasicauth ### [ 43%] 4:authhub-totp ### [ 57%] 5:authhub-yubikey### [ 71%] 6:authhub-debuginfo ### [ 86%] 7:authhub-client ### [100%] [build@dhcp201-157 x86_64]$ Upstream sources match the sources used to build the package [build@dhcp201-157 SOURCES]$ sha256sum authhub-0.1.1.tar.gz 1c6c5b6e1b0ef83c22915e7a37800fc1a35ec4f2bf7da335383a8154be89a959 authhub-0.1.1.tar.gz kashyap@Downloads$ sha256sum authhub-0.1.1.tar.gz 1c6c5b6e1b0ef83c22915e7a37800fc1a35ec4f2bf7da335383a8154be89a959 authhub-0.1.1.tar.gz kashyap@Downloads$ Rpmlint Warnings: Can be waived as they're false positives w.r.t the UsrMove feature. Filed a seperate bug for that -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794777 [build@dhcp201-157 SPECS]$ rpmlint authhub.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/authhub-* authhub-httpbasicauth.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib authhub-httpbasicauth.x86_64: W: no-documentation authhub-totp.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib authhub-totp.x86_64: W: no-documentation authhub-yubikey.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib authhub-yubikey.x86_64: W: no-documentation 6 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. [build@dhcp201-157 SPECS]$ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791363] Review Request: perl-XML-DTDParser - Quick and dirty DTD parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791363
Paul Howarth changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC||p...@city-fan.org
AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|p...@city-fan.org
--- Comment #1 from Paul Howarth 2012-02-17 10:36:56 EST ---
First pass:
Package fails to build in mock:
Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.YlZXgq
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ LANG=C
+ export LANG
+ unset DISPLAY
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ rm -rf XML-DTDParser-2.01
+ /usr/bin/gzip -dc /builddir/build/SOURCES/XML-DTDParser-2.01.tar.gz
+ /usr/bin/tar -xf -
+ STATUS=0
+ '[' 0 -ne 0 ']'
+ cd XML-DTDParser-2.01
+ /usr/bin/chmod -Rf a+rX,u+w,g-w,o-w .
Executing(%build): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.feEGiz
+ exit 0
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ cd XML-DTDParser-2.01
+ LANG=C
+ export LANG
+ unset DISPLAY
+ /usr/bin/perl Makefile.PL INSTALLDIRS=vendor
Checking if your kit is complete...
Looks good
Writing Makefile for XML::DTDParser
+ make -j4
cp DTDParser.pm blib/lib/XML/DTDParser.pm
Manifying blib/man3/XML::DTDParser.3pm
+ find . -type f -exec sed -i 's/\r//' '{}' ';'
+ exit 0
Executing(%install): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.mHe7cJ
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ '[' /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-XML-DTDParser-2.01-1.fc18.x86_64 '!=' /
']'
+ rm -rf /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-XML-DTDParser-2.01-1.fc18.x86_64
++ dirname /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-XML-DTDParser-2.01-1.fc18.x86_64
+ mkdir -p /builddir/build/BUILDROOT
+ mkdir /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-XML-DTDParser-2.01-1.fc18.x86_64
+ cd XML-DTDParser-2.01
+ LANG=C
+ export LANG
+ unset DISPLAY
+ rm -rf /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-XML-DTDParser-2.01-1.fc18.x86_64
+ make pure_install
PERL_INSTALL_ROOT=/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/perl-XML-DTDParser-2.01-1.fc18.x86_64
Makefile out-of-date with respect to Makefile.PL
Cleaning current config before rebuilding Makefile...
make -f Makefile.old clean > /dev/null 2>&1
/usr/bin/perl Makefile.PL "INSTALLDIRS=vendor"
Checking if your kit is complete...
Looks good
Writing Makefile for XML::DTDParser
==> Your Makefile has been rebuilt. <==
==> Please rerun the make command. <==
false
make: *** [Makefile] Error 1
error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.mHe7cJ (%install)
Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.mHe7cJ (%install)
RPM build errors:
Child return code was: 1
I suspect that this is because you are fixing the line endings in %build after
"make". You should fix line endings and make other source changes in %prep
where possible, which would avoid this problem. Also I think only the README
file actually needs its line-endings fixed anyway, so there's no need to touch
the other files.
It's usual practice now to use DESTDIR rather than PERL_INSTALL_ROOT when
installing.
Consider adding buildreqs for Perl core modules used by the module and its test
suite: Exporter, FileHandle, strict, File::Spec, Cwd and Test.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on 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 #12 from leigh scott 2012-02-17 10:36:11 EST --- Updated to 1.3.0 (requires muffin 1.0.1) SPEC: http://leigh123linux.fedorapeople.org/pub/review/cinnamon/5/cinnamon.spec SRPM: http://leigh123linux.fedorapeople.org/pub/review/cinnamon/5/cinnamon-1.3.0-1.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 790985] Review Request: python-mwlib-docbook - DocBook writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790985 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 10:31:47 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 790984] Review Request: python-mwlib-xhtml - XHTML writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790984 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 10:31:09 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 715610] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Exception - Throw HTTP-Errors as (Exception::Class-) Exceptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715610 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 10:29:22 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 505260] Review Request: perl-Exception-Class-TryCatch - Syntactic try/catch sugar for use with Exception::Class
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505260 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 10:28:39 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 562378] Review Request: perl-PSGI - Perl Web Server Gateway Interface Specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562378 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 10:28:57 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 757156] Review Request: perl-Env-C - Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757156 --- Comment #15 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 10:30:35 EST --- In looking closer, it doesn't look like this has been 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 785923] Review Request: xgap - GUI for GAP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785923 --- Comment #4 from Volker Fröhlich 2012-02-17 10:19:33 EST --- The desktop file has a number of flaws. I therefore attached a modified copy. - Don't hardcode icons; I also wonder why this package has no icon but there is an icon and a copy of this desktop file in gap-core, which is no desktop application, as far as I can see. - Is there really a MIME type? If so, you need a scriptlet. - Would you really execute xgap handing over a list of URLs? (%U) - "Comment" is shown as context help for the application and should give the user a clue what that program does. You don't need a comment, but the original comment is not suitable. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Desktop_files http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/desktop-entry-spec-latest.html Please use the name macro consistently. You're using it on some occasions, but not on others, e. g. patch0. Please always change the release number and write to the changelog. The reviewer otherwise can easily miss out changes. I wonder if everything installed in /usr/share/gap/pkg/xgap is really necessary, for instance manual.dvi, manual.tex or Makefile. The same is true for other gap packages. You might also consider to install the necessary files with the doc macro and leave a 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 785923] Review Request: xgap - GUI for GAP
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785923 --- Comment #5 from Volker Fröhlich 2012-02-17 10:20:51 EST --- Created attachment 563928 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=563928 Improved desktop file for xgap -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790984] Review Request: python-mwlib-xhtml - XHTML writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790984 Ian Weller changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Ian Weller 2012-02-17 10:14:45 EST --- Thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-mwlib-xhtml Short Description: XHTML writer for mwlib Owners: ianweller Branches: f16 f17 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 505260] Review Request: perl-Exception-Class-TryCatch - Syntactic try/catch sugar for use with Exception::Class
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=505260 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Emmanuel Seyman 2012-02-17 10:12:38 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-Exception-Class-TryCatch New Branches: el6 Owners: eseyman ktdreyer InitialCC: perl-sig Ken Dreyer contacted me for an el6 branch for this module. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 562378] Review Request: perl-PSGI - Perl Web Server Gateway Interface Specification
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=562378 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Emmanuel Seyman 2012-02-17 10:14:01 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-PSGI New Branches: el6 Owners: eseyman ktdreyer InitialCC: perl-sig Ken Dreyer contacted me for an el6 branch for this module. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 715610] Review Request: perl-HTTP-Exception - Throw HTTP-Errors as (Exception::Class-) Exceptions
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=715610 Emmanuel Seyman changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Emmanuel Seyman 2012-02-17 10:13:09 EST --- Package Change Request == Package Name: perl-HTTP-Exception New Branches: el6 Owners: eseyman ktdreyer InitialCC: perl-sig Ken Dreyer contacted me for an el6 branch for this module. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790985] Review Request: python-mwlib-docbook - DocBook writer for mwlib
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790985 Ian Weller changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Ian Weller 2012-02-17 10:14:39 EST --- Thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-mwlib-docbook Short Description: DocBook writer for mwlib Owners: ianweller Branches: f16 f17 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 722713] Review Request: ace - Optimal route search in a complete graph
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=722713 Mauricio Cleveland changed: What|Removed |Added Version|rawhide |16 --- Comment #15 from Mauricio Cleveland 2012-02-17 10:06:42 EST --- http://code.google.com/p/curvatura/source/browse/src/pyace-3.0-1.fc16.noarch.rpm http://code.google.com/p/curvatura/source/browse/src/pyace-3.0-1.fc16.src.rpm http://code.google.com/p/curvatura/source/browse/ace.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 757156] Review Request: perl-Env-C - Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757156 Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #14 from Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak 2012-02-17 10:10:13 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Env-C Short Description: Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level Owners: yenya Branches: f15 f16 f17 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 790893] Review Request: ibus-hunspell-table - Predictive text using hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790893 Daiki Ueno changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs+ --- Comment #3 from Daiki Ueno 2012-02-17 09:39:22 EST --- (In reply to comment #2) > I guess you need to update your review template. Regarding pkgconfig > rule, > its been removed long ago. Oh, thanks for pointing out this. I have used: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/ReviewTemplate Anyway, then I would approve this package except the upstream issues and the timestamp thing. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790893] Review Request: ibus-hunspell-table - Predictive text using hunspell dictionaries
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790893 Daiki Ueno changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, fedora-cvs+ |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 705773] Review Request: erlang-meck - A mocking library for Erlang
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=705773 Lubomir Rintel changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-02-17 09:24:11 --- Comment #9 from Lubomir Rintel 2012-02-17 09:24:11 EST --- Thank you. Imported and built. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 785785] Review Request: pkgdiff - A tool for analyzing changes in Linux software packages
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=785785 --- Comment #18 from Richard Shaw 2012-02-17 09:11:22 EST --- Thanks Andrey! SPEC: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pkgdiff/pkgdiff.spec SRPM: http://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pkgdiff/pkgdiff-1.2-1.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 791263] Review Request: mockito - A Java mocking 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=791263
--- Comment #8 from Alexander Kurtakov 2012-02-17
08:59:58 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 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: 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.
[x]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint mockito-javadoc-1.9.0-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
mockito-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -> Java docs,
Java-docs, Avocados
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint mockito-1.9.0-1.fc18.src.rpm
mockito.src: W: invalid-url Source0: mockito-1.9.0.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint mockito-1.9.0-1.fc18.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[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.
[x]: 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 Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[-]: SHOULD SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
Note: Source0: mockito-%{version}.tar.xz (mockito-%{version}.tar.xz)
Patch0: fixup-ant-script.patch (fixup-ant-script.patch) Patch1: fix-
cglib-refs.patch (fix-cglib-refs.patch)
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[-]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[-]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of orig
[Bug 757156] Review Request: perl-Env-C - Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757156 Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak 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 757156] Review Request: perl-Env-C - Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757156 --- Comment #12 from Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak 2012-02-17 08:45:16 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-Env-C Short Description: Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level Owners: yenya Branches: f15 f16 f17 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 757156] Review Request: perl-Env-C - Get/Set/Unset Environment Variables on the C level
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757156 --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla 2012-02-17 08:45:30 EST --- Please include an SCM request. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791263] Review Request: mockito - A Java mocking 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=791263 Alexander Kurtakov changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||akurt...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|akurt...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from Alexander Kurtakov 2012-02-17 08:39:00 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 794715] Review Request: ognl - Object Graph Navigation 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=794715 --- Comment #2 from Andy Grimm 2012-02-17 08:01:18 EST --- I understand your point. One alternative here would be to take a subversion revision from apache.org after they updated the license. I've already investigated this possibility. I found a revision in the ASF repo from May where the license has been updated to ASL 2.0 and all of the packages have been moved into the org.apache.commons namespace. They had already updated the version to "4.0-SNAPSHOT" at that point, but the code is essentially ognl-3.0.2. I'm happy to package this instead, as it would simplify the legal situation. I'm not interested in make spot / Fedora Legal review a license for a dead company. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794715] Review Request: ognl - Object Graph Navigation 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=794715 --- Comment #3 from Alexander Kurtakov 2012-02-17 08:04:56 EST --- Andy, This sounds like a solution. Once you upload the new package we can drop the block. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794725] Review Request: txw2 - Typed XML writer for Java
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794725 Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) changed: What|Removed |Added CC|kwiz...@gmail.com |nott...@redhat.com, ||package-review@lists.fedora ||project.org Component|oyranos |Package Review AssignedTo|kwiz...@gmail.com |nob...@fedoraproject.org --- Comment #1 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) 2012-02-17 08:00:58 EST --- Assigned to a wrong component. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 754023] Review Request: Mumpot - GTK mapping application
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=754023 --- Comment #5 from Volker Fröhlich 2012-02-17 08:00:11 EST --- Spec URL: http://www.geofrogger.net/review/mumpot.spec SRPM URL: http://www.geofrogger.net/review/mumpot-0.6-3.fc16.src.rpm - Add patch to use up-to-date libpng 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
