[Bug 797330] Review request: xsensors - An X11 interface to lm_sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797330 Cédric OLIVIER cedric.oliv...@free.fr changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cedric.oliv...@free.fr AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|cedric.oliv...@free.fr Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797330] Review request: xsensors - An X11 interface to lm_sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797330 --- Comment #2 from Cédric OLIVIER cedric.oliv...@free.fr 2012-03-11 04:42:40 EDT --- There is a problem when trying to build it with mock on fedora-16-i386 : checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/xsensors-0.70': configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile See `config.log' for more details. erreur: Mauvais status de sortie pour /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ARt9UR (%build) Mauvais status de sortie pour /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ARt9UR (%build) Erreur de construction de RPM: Child return code was: 1 EXCEPTION: Command failed. See logs for output. when looking in config.log : configure:2688: gcc -V 5 gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-V' gcc: fatal error: no input files compilation terminated. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801614] Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API 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=801614 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgold...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 05:20:42 EDT --- Thanks, I'll take this! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 619380] Review Request: giis - Solution to undelete files gET iT i sAY
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=619380 --- Comment #8 from Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it 2012-03-11 05:47:53 EDT --- You have to use Systemd units instead of SysV: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Systemd 'Each package that contains software that wants/needs to start a traditional service at boot MUST have a systemd unit file.' -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 795801] Review Request: paranamer - Library for accessing private methods at runtime
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=795801 Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it changed: What|Removed |Added CC||punto...@libero.it --- Comment #1 from Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it 2012-03-11 05:53:59 EDT --- *** Bug 797338 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 797338] Review Request: paranamer - Method parameter name access
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797338 Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED CC||mattia.ve...@tiscali.it Resolution||DUPLICATE Flag||fedora-review- Last Closed||2012-03-11 05:53:59 --- Comment #1 from Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it 2012-03-11 05:53:59 EDT --- There's already a review ticket open for paranamer. Duplicate of #795801 *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 795801 *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798079] Review Request: vaildns - DNS and DNSSEC zone file validator:q
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798079 Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mattia.ve...@tiscali.it AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mattia.ve...@tiscali.it Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it 2012-03-11 06:09:53 EDT --- Taking for 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 798438] Review Request: uthash-devel - Hash table and linked list for C structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798438 --- Comment #3 from Bas van den Dikkenberg b...@dikkenberg.net 2012-03-11 06:10:12 EDT --- Thanks for the review i think o solved almost all of the isues new version availebol at: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64647042/uthash-devel.spec http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64647042/uthash-devel-1.9.5-1.src.rpm Please review it again -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798438] Review Request: uthash-devel - Hash table and linked list for C structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798438 --- Comment #4 from Bas van den Dikkenberg b...@dikkenberg.net 2012-03-11 06:12:37 EDT --- RPM lint warning ignord, i ignord rpmplint warning about the build section because there is nothing to 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 798079] Review Request: vaildns - DNS and DNSSEC zone file validator:q
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798079 Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #3 from Mattia Verga mattia.ve...@tiscali.it 2012-03-11 06:20:44 EDT --- - rpmlint checks return: validns.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) validator - lavatorial validns.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US validator - lavatorial validns.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary validns validns.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) validator - lavatorial validns.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US validator - lavatorial 3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Warnings can be ignored: OK - naming guidelines and .spec file name: OK - packaging guidelines: OK - license: OK (BSD), in %doc - spec file legible, in am. english: OK - source matches upstream: OK - package compiles on (i686/x86_64): OK - Build Requires / Requires: OK - no locales - no libraries - not relocatable - no directories created - no duplicate files - file permissions: OK - macros: OK - code/content: OK - no need for -docs - nothing in %doc affects runtime - no headers / no need for -devel - no .desktop file - ownership: OK - filenames: OK koji test build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3881133 For me is 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 737293] Review Request: python-django - A high-level Python Web 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=737293 --- Comment #16 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me 2012-03-11 06:48:09 EDT --- Weird, those are different from the build errors I get from a local mock setup. My suggestion is adding an optional --with build option for running the test suite, until we resolve these test problems; until then, maintainers can make sure that a local rpmbuild rebuild (which currently works for 1.3.1-7) at least passes. When the tests are fixed we can flip the switch to make building with tests the default (and maybe make it non-default for unbranched Rawhide so we can quickly test new versions). Bohuslav, any other change we need to make for the review, apart from the test suite as already discussed? 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 801651] Review Request: jboss-jacc-1.4-api - JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801651
Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 07:58:57
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint SPECS/jboss-jacc-1.4-api.spec
SPECS/jboss-jacc-1.4-api.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
jboss-jacc-1.4-api-1.0.2.20120310git7976d2.tar.xz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings
$ rpmlint SRPMS/jboss-jacc-1.4-api-1.0.2-0.1.20120310git7976d2.fc17.src.rpm
jboss-jacc-1.4-api.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
jboss-jacc-1.4-api.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP Error
403: Forbidden
jboss-jacc-1.4-api.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
jboss-jacc-1.4-api-1.0.2.20120310git7976d2.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[ ] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: f7960b6e85254e6399f70ef0247148c1
MD5SUM upstream package: f7960b6e85254e6399f70ef0247148c1
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[X] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:
Build fine locally, with the jboss-servlet-3.0-api package available.
*** APPROVED ***
I'm approving this package, but you need to wait for
[Bug 797418] Review Request: qtractor - Audio/MIDI multi-track sequencer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797418 --- Comment #9 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 08:17:11 EDT --- Of course. Been running it locally here as per this build for a week or so now with no obvious issues. SRPM: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/qtractor-0.5.4-1.fc16.src.rpm SPEC: http://bsjones.fedorapeople.org/qtractor.spec We're still blocked on bug 783825. 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 730227] Review Request: jboss-transaction-1.1-api - Transaction 1.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730227 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 08:27:53 EDT --- jboss-transaction-1.1-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120309git3970b8.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/jboss-transaction-1.1-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120309git3970b8.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 801614] Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API 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=801614
Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 08:29:08
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint SPECS/jboss-connector-1.6-api.spec
SPECS/jboss-connector-1.6-api.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
jboss-connector-1.6-api-1.0.1.20120310git9dc9a5.tar.xz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint
SRPMS/jboss-connector-1.6-api-1.0.1-0.1.20120310git9dc9a5.fc17.src.rpm
jboss-connector-1.6-api.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
jboss-connector-1.6-api.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP
Error 403: Forbidden
jboss-connector-1.6-api.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
jboss-connector-1.6-api-1.0.1.20120310git9dc9a5.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: fa6744a04e058db5ccab5a5c93a0f976
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: fa6744a04e058db5ccab5a5c93a0f976
MD5SUM upstream package: fa6744a04e058db5ccab5a5c93a0f976
[X] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:
Locally, builds fine with jboss-transaction-1.1-api package available.
*** APPROVED ***
I just imported
[Bug 730227] Review Request: jboss-transaction-1.1-api - Transaction 1.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730227 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730227] Review Request: jboss-transaction-1.1-api - Transaction 1.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730227 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 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 801865] Review Request: jboss-transaction-spi - JBoss Transaction 7.0.0 SPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801865 Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mgold...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 08:32:48 EDT --- I'll take it. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801865] Review Request: jboss-transaction-spi - JBoss Transaction 7.0.0 SPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801865
--- Comment #4 from Marek Goldmann mgold...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 08:46:21
EDT ---
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
$ rpmlint SPECS/jboss-transaction-spi.spec
SPECS/jboss-transaction-spi.spec: W: invalid-url Source0:
jboss-transaction-spi-7.0.0.Final.tar.xz
0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
$ rpmlint SRPMS/jboss-transaction-spi-7.0.0-1.fc17.src.rpm
jboss-transaction-spi.src: I: enchant-dictionary-not-found en_US
jboss-transaction-spi.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP Error
403: Forbidden
jboss-transaction-spi.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
jboss-transaction-spi-7.0.0.Final.tar.xz
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[X] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[X] Buildroot definition is not present
[X] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: LGPLv2+
[-] 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.
[-] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
MD5SUM this package: cb0b576ff66bad399f0f5145f61a8edc
MD5SUM upstream package: 69afeca29e41f9ad8c014c502d8231e3
SVN export.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[X] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[!] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
See #1.
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on:
Locally, builds fine with dependent packages available.
=== Issues ===
1. Please remove -Dmaven.test.skip=true. Although there are no test, there is
no reason to skip them :)
2. Please remove 7.0.0 from the Summary field and rename this bug report too.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
[Bug 694950] Review Request: torrent-search - A torrent searching graphical 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=694950 Praveen Kumar kumarpraveen.nit...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 765802] Review Request: indimpc - A minimalist MPD client with support for the gnome-shell and multimedia keys
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=765802 --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha sanjay.an...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 09:45:23 EDT --- Hello, * Sun Mar 11 2012 Ankur Sinha ankursinha AT fedoraproject DOT org - 0-1.20111209.git - Add requires on ncmpc++ - Added a README.fedora file - Added comment on how to obtain the source tar New spec/srpm: http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/indimpc/indimpc.spec http://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/indimpc/indimpc-0-1.20111209.git.fc18.src.rpm Thanks, Ankur -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794946] Review Request: 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 agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 11:04:24 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: XmlSchema Short Description: Lightweight schema object model Owners: arg Branches: 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 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 agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 11:01:31 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: neethi Short Description: Web Services Policy framework Owners: arg Branches: f17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796201] Review Request: glassfish-jaxb - JAXB Reference 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=796201 Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 11:14:41 EDT --- Confirmed that the rpmlint issue is fixed. Looks good. 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 801614] Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API 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=801614 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 11:17:55 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jboss-connector-1.6-api Short Description: Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API classes Owners: ricardo Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790990] Review Request: annogen - Java framework for JSR-175 annotations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790990 --- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 11:31:01 EDT --- Fixed: SPEC: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/SPECS/annogen.spec SRPM: http://downloads.eucalyptus.com/devel/packages/fedora-17/sources/annogen-0.1.0-2.fc18.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 740799] Review Request: jboss-jad-1.2-api - JavaEE Application Deployment 1.2 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740799 Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||agr...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|agr...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930 --- Comment #17 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 11:48:03 EDT --- (In reply to comment #13) (In reply to comment #12) You need a %doc entry in the %files section of the main package. Read this: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing If this is enough, I'd be happy to remove the all-licenses file, however, I get the impression that (paraphrasing license.txt) There are a whole bunch of individual licenses (some custom-written), dig through the subfolders in order to find them ..is not really good enough, or is it? Note that there are a few home-made licenses there as well, my comments in the spec file only cover those which have a known shortname in Fedora. Its really your call, if some of the maps/content etc are packaged under differing licenses from the main package you should consider sub-packaging those files if feasible and they can be contained. It could also set a precedent for future maps You should also uncomment the requires and remove the bundled enet. Write your spec as if the enet you require is available (looks like someone will be looking at this soon). if you have already an enet spec patch please attach it to the blocker if you haven't already -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 480724] Review Request: ndjbdns - New djbdns, usable djbdns.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724 --- Comment #60 from pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in 2012-03-11 12:07:03 EDT --- OMG...such a *bliss* to see this approved! Thank you so much! :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798998] Review Request: libcdr - a library for import of Corel Draw drawings
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798998
Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mschwe...@gmail.com
--- Comment #3 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 12:11:54
EDT ---
Thanks. Meanwhile, I've had a look at things other than just the spec file:
* The licensing is not clear yet. Spec says:
License: GPL+ or LGPLv2+ or MPLv1.1
That sounds like MPL tri-license, but the file contents disagree:
1) COPYING.GPL is the GPLv2 not GPL+
2) src/conv/raw/cdr2raw.cpp is LGPLv2+ only (!) and linking with libcdr
3) src/conv/svg/cdr2xhtml.cpp : MPLv1.1 tri-license header
4) src/lib/* :
some files explicitly mention MPL 1.1 / GPLv2+ / LGPLv2+,
which is the tri-license
CDRDocument.h : LGPLv2+ only (!)
libcdr.h : LGPLv2+ only (!)
All others contain the MPLv1.1 tri-license header with explicit
GPLv2+/LGPLv2+ option at the bottom.
The two files with LGPLv2+ header belong to the libcdr API,
$ rpmls -p libcdr-devel-0.0.3-2.fc17.x86_64.rpm|grep \.h
-rw-r--r-- /usr/include/libcdr-0.0/libcdr/CDRDocument.h
-rw-r--r-- /usr/include/libcdr-0.0/libcdr/CDRStringVector.h
-rw-r--r-- /usr/include/libcdr-0.0/libcdr/libcdr.h
and /usr/bin/cdr2raw is in the separate -tools package.
There is no statement that those files are dual-/multi-licensed in any way.
That makes the library LGPLv2+ licensed IMO. License clarification by the
developers would be helpful.
* I assume you are aware of these few items which are not needed in spec files
anymore:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#File_Permissions
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean
* There's an old packaging trick to ship subpackage documentation in the
subpackage's own versioned docdir. Currently:
$ rpmls -p libcdr-doc-0.0.3-2.fc17.noarch.rpm | grep ^d
drwxr-xr-x /usr/share/doc/libcdr
drwxr-xr-x /usr/share/doc/libcdr-doc-0.0.3
drwxr-xr-x /usr/share/doc/libcdr/html
--- libcdr.spec.ORIG 2012-03-11 16:23:18.395893248 +0100
+++ libcdr.spec 2012-03-11 17:04:52.849667449 +0100
@@ -63,6 +63,7 @@
rm -rf %{buildroot}
make install DESTDIR=%{buildroot}
rm -f %{buildroot}/%{_libdir}/*.la
+rm -rf _tmpdoc mkdir _tmpdoc mv %{buildroot}%{_docdir}/%{name}/html
_tmpdoc
%clean
@@ -90,9 +91,7 @@
%files doc
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
-%doc COPYING.*
-%dir %{_docdir}/%{name}
-%{_docdir}/%{name}/html
+%doc _tmpdoc/html COPYING.*
%files tools
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 --- Comment #61 from Raphael Groner raph...@web.de 2012-03-11 12:33:26 EDT --- Is it possible to get OTR included? Please consider the patch in ArchLinux forum. https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=134458 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930
--- Comment #18 from Martin Erik Werner martinerikwer...@gmail.com 2012-03-11
12:34:35 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #17)
(In reply to comment #13)
(In reply to comment #12)
You need a %doc entry in the %files section of the main package. Read
this:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Subpackage_Licensing
If this is enough, I'd be happy to remove the all-licenses file, however, I
get
the impression that (paraphrasing license.txt)
There are a whole bunch of individual licenses (some custom-written), dig
through the subfolders in order to find them
..is not really good enough, or is it?
Note that there are a few home-made licenses there as well, my comments in
the
spec file only cover those which have a known shortname in Fedora.
Its really your call, if some of the maps/content etc are packaged under
differing licenses from the main package you should consider sub-packaging
those files if feasible and they can be contained. It could also set a
precedent for future maps
I will not do this at this point in time at least, I think it would complicate
the packaging greatly, and make updating it a chore (content changing - new
packages).
I mean, in that case I would package two images on one package, a sound file in
another, one map in one package and the rest in another package, if going just
based on licensing...
You should also uncomment the requires and remove the bundled enet. Write your
spec as if the enet you require is available (looks like someone will be
looking at this soon). if you have already an enet spec patch please attach it
to the blocker if you haven't already
Ok, done
I do have a spec patch:
-Version:1.2.1
-Release:3%{?dist}
+Version:1.3.3
+Release:1%{?dist}
I figured it was not worth attaching.
spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/7/redeclipse.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 802035] Review Request: librabbitmq - Client library and command line tools for AMPQ
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802035 Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com 2012-03-11 12:39:13 EDT --- Thanks for the review. %check added https://github.com/remicollet/remirepo/commit/df3ed65bcd3320466b03e60c93a064559bd1c9dc New Package SCM Request === Package Name: librabbitmq Short Description: Client library and command line tools for AMPQ Owners: remi Branches: f16 f17 el5 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 800930] Review Request: redeclipse - Multiplayer FPS game based on Cube2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800930
--- Comment #19 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones...@gmail.com 2012-03-11
12:40:43 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #18)
I will not do this at this point in time at least, I think it would complicate
the packaging greatly, and make updating it a chore (content changing - new
packages).
I mean, in that case I would package two images on one package, a sound file
in
another, one map in one package and the rest in another package, if going just
based on licensing...
not feasible then
You should also uncomment the requires and remove the bundled enet. Write
your
spec as if the enet you require is available (looks like someone will be
looking at this soon). if you have already an enet spec patch please attach
it
to the blocker if you haven't already
Ok, done
I do have a spec patch:
-Version:1.2.1
-Release:3%{?dist}
+Version:1.3.3
+Release:1%{?dist}
I figured it was not worth attaching.
spec URL: http://arand.fedorapeople.org/7/redeclipse.spec
ha ha - I see your point
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 --- Comment #62 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru 2012-03-11 12:41:53 EDT --- I afraid it is imposible to get psi-plus included in Fedora. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 794985] Review Request: perl-Data-AMF - Serialize/deserialize Adobe's AMF (ActionMessageFormat) data
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=794985 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||perl-Data-AMF-0.09-2.fc17 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 12:57:44 EDT --- perl-Data-AMF-0.09-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 790538] Review Request: python-liblarch - Data structures helper library for python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790538 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-liblarch-0.1.0-2.fc1 ||7 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 12:58:18 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 12:58:18 EDT --- python-liblarch-0.1.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 789611] Review Request: jackson - Jackson Java JSON-processor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=789611 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||jackson-1.9.4-2.fc17 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 12:57:14 EDT --- jackson-1.9.4-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 799694] Review Request: dwb - Dynamic web browser based on WebKit and GTK+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799694 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||dwb-2012.02.01-3.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 12:58:08 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 12:58:08 EDT --- dwb-2012.02.01-3.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 797330] Review request: xsensors - An X11 interface to lm_sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=797330 --- Comment #3 from Jeremy Newton alexjn...@hotmail.com 2012-03-11 13:01:03 EDT --- (In reply to comment #2) There is a problem when trying to build it with mock on fedora-16-i386 : checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: in `/builddir/build/BUILD/xsensors-0.70': configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile See `config.log' for more details. erreur: Mauvais status de sortie pour /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ARt9UR (%build) Mauvais status de sortie pour /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.ARt9UR (%build) Erreur de construction de RPM: Child return code was: 1 EXCEPTION: Command failed. See logs for output. when looking in config.log : configure:2688: gcc -V 5 gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-V' gcc: fatal error: no input files compilation terminated. Interesting, building failed for me but in the %install step due to a missing dependency, rather than your error, which is in the %build step. I added the missing dependency, removed the build flags, and it built fine for me in mock (fc16-i386). Can you give it another shot? SPEC: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/42480493/xsensors.spec SRPM: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/42480493/xsensors-0.70-2.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 799810] Review Request: python-picloud - PiCloud client-side 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=799810
--- Comment #10 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2012-03-11 13:22:01 EDT
---
Please look at these examples:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs
Your format is the one without the dash, but you're missing the release number.
* Fri Mar 9 2012 Amit Saha amitks...@fedoraproject.org 2.4.2
should be
* Fri Mar 9 2012 Amit Saha amitks...@fedoraproject.org 2.4.2-2
%{_bindir}/ must be %{_bindir}/*, otherwise you're trying to own /usr/bin.
You could also consider to patch setup.py. That'd get you rid of the error
message while installing and you don't have to install manpage and bash
completion file on your own.
On second thoughts: The bash completion should probably not be considered
configuration at all. I looked through a couple of bash completion files (yum,
mock, git, bash-completion) and none of them labels it as configuration. I
guess you should do the same.
rpm -qf /etc/bash_completion.d/mock.bash
rpm -qc mock
...
If you incorporate these changes, the package is pretty fine from my point of
view. Nevertheslles I can't take the review, because you need a sponsor.
For the reviewer: The package now builds in Mock.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801865] Review Request: jboss-transaction-spi - JBoss Transaction SPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801865 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |jboss-transaction-spi - |jboss-transaction-spi - |JBoss Transaction 7.0.0 SPI |JBoss Transaction SPI -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801865] Review Request: jboss-transaction-spi - JBoss Transaction SPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801865 --- Comment #5 from Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 13:39:03 EDT --- Done! Spec URL: http://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-transaction-spi/3/jboss-transaction-spi.spec SRPM URL: http://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/jboss-transaction-spi/3/jboss-transaction-spi-7.0.0-1.fc17.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 480724] Review Request: ndjbdns - New djbdns, usable djbdns.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724 --- Comment #63 from Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 13:47:28 EDT --- You are welcome. Couple of quick notes before you import: * List the binaries individually rather than use a wildcard * If you are creating log files in /var/log by default, you should run logrotate on them. See other spec files for examples. say httpd.spec * You might want to change the upstream url to ndjbdns as well to avoid any confusion with the original source. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 626004] Review Request: osm2pgsql - Imports map data from OpenStreetMap to a PostgreSQL database
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=626004 Mark mark.a.sl...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mark.a.sl...@gmail.com --- Comment #17 from Mark mark.a.sl...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 14:08:33 EDT --- is anyone still working on this? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 480724] Review Request: ndjbdns - New djbdns, usable djbdns.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724 --- Comment #61 from pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in 2012-03-11 12:26:07 EDT --- (In reply to comment #59) There are several other code improvements suggested in this review that you should look at but they aren't blockers to getting this in the repository. So I am approving this and recommend that you go through the history of this review and apply patches and changes from branches/forks of djbdns as applicable. Yes, I'll do that. Once again, thanks a lot! :) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 480724] Review Request: ndjbdns - New djbdns, usable djbdns.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=480724 pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #62 from pjp pj.pan...@yahoo.co.in 2012-03-11 13:43:28 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: ndjbdns Short Description: New djbdns. Owners: pjp Branches: f15 f16 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 781260] Review Request: leechcraft - A Free Open Source Cross-Platform Modular Internet-Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781260 --- Comment #17 from Minh Ngo nlmin...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 14:20:11 EDT --- 0.5.0-3 SPEC: https://raw.github.com/Ignotus/leechcraft-fedora/751542519992278037bca5a42e13f925d0fa46f5/leechcraft.spec SRPM: https://github.com/Ignotus/leechcraft-fedora/blob/751542519992278037bca5a42e13f925d0fa46f5/leechcraft-0.5.0-2.fc16.src.rpm?raw=true -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 781260] Review Request: leechcraft - A Free Open Source Cross-Platform Modular Internet-Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781260 --- Comment #18 from Minh Ngo nlmin...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 14:23:16 EDT --- I'm sorry. There are incorrect version. 0.5.0-3 SPEC: https://raw.github.com/Ignotus/leechcraft-fedora/29633e695014f4f50800b4e5d1bfe614a316ce57/leechcraft.spec SRPM: https://github.com/Ignotus/leechcraft-fedora/blob/master/leechcraft-0.5.0-3.fc16.src.rpm?raw=true -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 604971] Review Request: jwm - Joe's Window Manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604971 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|jwm-2.0.1-6.svn500.fc16 |jwm-2.0.1-10.svn500.el6 --- Comment #43 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 14:52:17 EDT --- jwm-2.0.1-10.svn500.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 195292] Review Request: Openbox
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=195292 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||openbox-3.5.0-4.el6 Resolution|NEXTRELEASE |ERRATA --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 14:52:05 EDT --- openbox-3.5.0-4.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802161] New: Review Request: mingw-w64-tools - Supplementary tools which are part of the mingw-w64 toolchain
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: mingw-w64-tools - Supplementary tools which are part of the mingw-w64 toolchain https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802161 Summary: Review Request: mingw-w64-tools - Supplementary tools which are part of the mingw-w64 toolchain Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: Unspecified OS/Version: Unspecified Status: NEW Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, fedora-mi...@lists.fedoraproject.org, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://svn.openftd.org/svn/fedora_cross/mingw-w64-tools/mingw-w64-tools.spec SRPM URL: http://build1.openftd.org/fedora-cross/src/mingw-w64-tools-2.0.999-0.2.trunk.20120124.fc16.src.rpm Description: Supplementary tools which are part of the mingw-w64 toolchain It contains gendef, genidl and mingw-w64-widl These tools are required to get mingw-cairo built using the delay-load feature (which makes freetype/fontconfig an optional runtime dependency of the cairo library instead of a hard dependency) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 796201] Review Request: glassfish-jaxb - JAXB Reference 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=796201 Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Juan Hernández juan.hernan...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 15:40:01 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: glassfish-jaxb Short Description: JAXB Reference Implementation Owners: jhernand Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798438] Review Request: uthash-devel - Hash table and linked list for C structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798438 --- Comment #5 from Michael Schwendt mschwe...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 15:52:08 EDT --- RPM lint warning ignord, Consult rpmlint -i ... please. Also, you've ignored much of what I've written in comment 2. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 --- Comment #63 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 16:31:05 EDT --- Raphael, in general, if you want a feature, get it upstream, carrying downstream feature patches are far from ideal. I'm on jabber now to try to contact psi-plus devs about bundled iris. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||psi-plus -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 --- Comment #64 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 16:39:55 EDT --- rats, I'm getting errors trying to send to psi-...@conference.jabber.ru atm. :( I'll try posting on their forum I guess. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 709328] Review Request: psi-plus - Jabber client based on Qt
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=709328 --- Comment #65 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 16:51:16 EDT --- and, my forum post is being held for moderation. frustrating. (but hopeful). Here's a copy of my post (for posterity): hi, I'm involved in trying to bring psi-plus to fedora (see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=psi-plus ).I'd already worked to package iris separately, using sources from http://delta.affinix.com/iris/ , but one issue here is that it bundles a modified copy of iris library. What is the relationship between psi/isis @ affinix.com and psi+ ? What modifications have been made to (affinix) iris, and more importantly, any immediate or long-term plans to upstream these back affinix? Would you be open to the possibility of downstream distros to be able to ship a common/unbundled iris library for application consumers (like psi, psi+, tomahawk, kopete, etc...)? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798438] Review Request: uthash-devel - Hash table and linked list for C structures
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798438 --- Comment #6 from Bas van den Dikkenberg b...@dikkenberg.net 2012-03-11 16:57:01 EDT --- Sorrie i did rpmlint -i on the spec file that was wrong, now i fixed a lot of extra issues the new downloads are: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64647042/uthash-devel.spec http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64647042/uthash-devel-1.9.5-2.src.rpm The following two rpmlint warnings are invallid: uthash-devel.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US utlist - titlist, list The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. utlist is a name becouse of that not in spelling dictionaire uthash-devel.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US preprocessor - processor, predecessor, process's The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. preprocessor is not in the spelling dictionaire -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720813] Review Request: python-strainer - Tools to allow developers to cleanup web serialization objects (HTML, JSON, XHTML)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720813
Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2012-03-11 17:03:48 EDT
---
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.
[-]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
[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 is needed only if supporting EPEL
[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.
[-]: 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 is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: MUST Package does not generate 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 python-strainer-0.1.4-2.fc18.src.rpm
python-strainer.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware -
middle ware, middle-ware, middleweight
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.
rpmlint python-strainer-0.1.4-2.fc18.noarch.rpm
python-strainer.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US middleware -
middle ware, middle-ware, middleweight
python-strainer.noarch: W: no-documentation
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
There is no documentation available outside Python docstrings.
middleware is a common spelling.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/media/speicher1/makerpm/720813/strainer-0.1.4.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : 5894adf6e0ea38f2c5e8bba2ae722448
MD5SUM upstream package : 5894adf6e0ea38f2c5e8bba2ae722448
[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.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[!]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Latest version is packaged.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary
[Bug 798715] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798715 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #13 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 17:06:34 EDT --- I guess I missed mentioning the need to add another scriptlet for Mimetype support, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database and likewise, if registerring new mimetypes, http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#mimeinfo but I won't consider that a blocker. just look into it. Otherwise, I'm happy with the changes done, and looks good. APPROVED. please post your fas ID, from http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Get_a_Fedora_Account and I'll sponsor you. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 781260] Review Request: leechcraft - A Free Open Source Cross-Platform Modular Internet-Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781260 Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #19 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 17:12:09 EDT --- Well, a minor nit... if you aren't shipping alternative iconsets (ie, tango has been remove), why bother splitting out oxygen-iconset at all? think about it. :) Anyway, my other issues have been resolved, 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 781260] Review Request: leechcraft - A Free Open Source Cross-Platform Modular Internet-Client
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=781260 Minh Ngo nlmin...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #20 from Minh Ngo nlmin...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 17:20:00 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: leechcraft Short Description: LeechCraft internet client Owners: ignotusp Branches: f15 f16 el6 InitialCC: -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798715] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798715 --- Comment #14 from Franco Comida francocom...@googlemail.com 2012-03-11 17:29:49 EDT --- My fas ID is fcomida I will update the spec file with the scriplets for mime type support as soon as the new version 2.2.1 is released. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 720813] Review Request: python-strainer - Tools to allow developers to cleanup web serialization objects (HTML, JSON, XHTML)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=720813 Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Luke Macken lmac...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 17:27:02 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: python-strainer Short Description: Tools to allow developers to cleanup web serialization objects (HTML, JSON, XHTML) Owners: lmacken ralph Branches: f15 f16 f17 el6 el5 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 798715] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798715 --- Comment #15 from Rex Dieter rdie...@math.unl.edu 2012-03-11 17:42:35 EDT --- sponsored, welcome! can move on to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 577951] Review Request: mingw-wine-gecko - MinGW Gecko library required for Wine
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=577951 --- Comment #26 from Andreas Bierfert andreas.bierf...@lowlatency.de 2012-03-11 17:44:23 EDT --- Thanks for the info. I will try to upgrade to latest wine-gecko during the week and maybe we can get this in soon. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802182] New: Review Request: ironjacamar - Java Connector Architecture 1.6 implementation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Review Request: ironjacamar - Java Connector Architecture 1.6 implementation https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=802182 Summary: Review Request: ironjacamar - Java Connector Architecture 1.6 implementation Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nob...@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: ricardo.argue...@gmail.com QAContact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Regression: --- Mount Type: --- Documentation: --- Spec URL: http://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/ironjacamar/1/ironjacamar.spec SRPM URL: http://ricardo.fedorapeople.org/package_review/ironjacamar/1/ironjacamar-1.0.7-3.fc17.src.rpm Description: The IronJacamar project implements the Java Connector Architecture 1.6 specification. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769919] Review Request: hydra - Very fast network log-on cracker
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769919 --- Comment #13 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2012-03-11 18:51:00 EDT --- Yes, it fails, if mysql-devel is installed. Can you solve 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 740799] Review Request: jboss-jad-1.2-api - JavaEE Application Deployment 1.2 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740799
Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag||fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #6 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 19:06:33 EDT ---
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
jboss-jad-1.2-api.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development/Java
jboss-jad-1.2-api.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP Error
403: Forbidden
jboss-jad-1.2-api.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/jboss-jad-1.2-api-1.0.1/LICENSE
jboss-jad-1.2-api-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -
Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
jboss-jad-1.2-api-javadoc.noarch: W: non-standard-group Development/Java
jboss-jad-1.2-api-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP
Error 403: Forbidden
jboss-jad-1.2-api-javadoc.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/jboss-jad-1.2-api-javadoc-1.0.1/LICENSE
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 5 warnings
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[x] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3881745
=== Issues ===
1. Please fix the Group tags. (Development/Java makes sense to me, but
Development/Libraries seems to be what we've standardized on.)
2. Please encourage upstream to fix the FSF address
=== Final Notes ===
[Bug 740799] Review Request: jboss-jad-1.2-api - JavaEE Application Deployment 1.2 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=740799 Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review?, fedora-cvs? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 19:07:12 EDT --- Oops, wrong flag change. sorry! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801651] Review Request: jboss-jacc-1.4-api - JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801651 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 19:09:06 EDT --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: jboss-jacc-1.4-api Short Description: JBoss Java Authorization Contract for Containers 1.4 API Owners: ricardo Branches: f17 InitialCC: goldmann -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 787713] Review request: free-solid - A 3D collision detection C++ 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=787713 --- Comment #9 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at 2012-03-11 19:18:47 EDT --- Builds in Mock, but doesn't build with rpmbuild on my system. ... + autoreconf -i libtoolize: putting macros in AC_CONFIG_MACRO_DIR, `m4'. libtoolize: copying file `m4/libtool.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltoptions.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltsugar.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/ltversion.m4' libtoolize: copying file `m4/lt~obsolete.m4' configure.in:26: required file `../ltmain.sh' not found autoreconf: automake failed with exit status: 1 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 724936] Review Request: python-mock - A Python Mocking and Patching Library for Testing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=724936 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|python-mock-0.7.2-1.fc16|python-mock-0.7.2-1.fc15 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 19:22:54 EDT --- python-mock-0.7.2-1.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 724936] Review Request: python-mock - A Python Mocking and Patching Library for Testing
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=724936 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||python-mock-0.7.2-1.fc16 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 19:22:40 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 19:22:40 EDT --- python-mock-0.7.2-1.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 798715] Review Request: Luminance HDR - A graphical tool for creating and tone-mapping HDR images
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=798715 Romain DEP. rom1...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rom1...@gmail.com --- Comment #16 from Romain DEP. rom1...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 19:44:15 EDT --- After some testing, the package as provided on sourceforge for fedora 16 x86_64 is in a good shape, app is stable, menu entries are ok. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799392] Review Request: geronimo-commonj - CommonJ 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=799392 Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|agr...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790497] Review Request: jboss-jms-1.1-api - JBoss JMS API 1.1 Spec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790497
Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 20:37:47 EDT ---
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[!] Rpmlint output:
jboss-jms-1.1-api.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP Error
403: Forbidden
jboss-jms-1.1-api.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/jboss-jms-1.1-api-1.0.1/LICENSE
jboss-jms-1.1-api.src: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP Error 403:
Forbidden
jboss-jms-1.1-api.src: W: invalid-url Source0:
jboss-jms-1.1-api-1.0.1.20120309gitc251f89.tar.xz
jboss-jms-1.1-api-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -
Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
jboss-jms-1.1-api-javadoc.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: http://www.jboss.org HTTP
Error 403: Forbidden
jboss-jms-1.1-api-javadoc.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
/usr/share/doc/jboss-jms-1.1-api-javadoc-1.0.1/LICENSE
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 5 warnings.
The Invalid URL messages are normal, but the incorrect FSF address should be
fixed upstream.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: CDDL or GPLv2 with exceptions
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
GIT source
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[x] Package uses %global not %define
[x] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3883350
=== Issues ===
1. Please notify upstream about the incorrect FSF
[Bug 772432] Review Request: gnome-applet-sensors - GNOME panel applet for hardware sensors
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=772432 --- Comment #7 from Jens Petersen peter...@redhat.com 2012-03-11 20:39:38 EDT --- Can someone please file a SCM request soon? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 790497] Review Request: jboss-jms-1.1-api - JBoss JMS API 1.1 Spec
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790497 Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||agr...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|agr...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799392] Review Request: geronimo-commonj - CommonJ 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=799392
Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Andy Grimm agr...@gmail.com 2012-03-11 21:04:50 EDT ---
=== REQUIRED ITEMS ===
[x] Rpmlint output:
geronimo-commonj.src: W: invalid-url Source0: geronimo-commonj-1.1.0.tar.xz
geronimo-commonj-javadoc.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Javadocs -
Java docs, Java-docs, Avocados
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[x] Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines[1].
[x] Spec file name must match the base package name, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x] Package meets the Packaging Guidelines[2].
[x] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms.
[x] Buildroot definition is not present
[x] Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other
legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines[3,4].
[x] License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
License type: ASL 2.0
[x] If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in
its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the
package is included in %doc.
[x] All independent sub-packages have license of their own
[x] Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
SVN source -- unpacked trees are identical
[x] All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines[5].
[x] Package must own all directories that it creates or must require other
packages for directories it uses.
[x] Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] File sections do not contain %defattr(-,root,root,-) unless changed with
good reason
[x] Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] Package does NOT have a %clean section which contains rm -rf %{buildroot}
(or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT). (not needed anymore)
[x] Package consistently uses macros (no %{buildroot} and $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
mixing)
[x] Package contains code, or permissable content.
[-] Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[-] Package contains a properly installed %{name}.desktop file if it is a GUI
application.
[x] Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] Javadoc documentation files are generated and included in -javadoc
subpackage
[x] Javadocs are placed in %{_javadocdir}/%{name} (no -%{version} symlinks)
[x] Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
[x] Javadoc subpackages have Require: jpackage-utils
[-] Package uses %global not %define
[!] If package uses tarball from VCS include comment how to re-create that
tarball (svn export URL, git clone URL, ...)
[-] If source tarball includes bundled jar/class files these need to be
removed prior to building
[x] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
[x] Jar files are installed to %{_javadir}/%{name}.jar (see [6] for details)
[x] If package contains pom.xml files install it (including depmaps) even when
building with ant
[x] pom files has correct add_maven_depmap
=== Maven ===
[x] Use %{_mavenpomdir} macro for placing pom files instead of
%{_datadir}/maven2/poms
[-] If package uses -Dmaven.test.skip=true explain why it was needed in a
comment
[-] If package uses custom depmap -Dmaven.local.depmap.file=* explain why
it's needed in a comment
[x] Package DOES NOT use %update_maven_depmap in %post/%postun
[x] Packages DOES NOT have Requires(post) and Requires(postun) on
jpackage-utils for %update_maven_depmap macro
=== Other suggestions ===
[x] If possible use upstream build method (maven/ant/javac)
[x] Avoid having BuildRequires on exact NVR unless necessary
[x] Package has BuildArch: noarch (if possible)
[x] Latest version is packaged.
[x] Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3883411
=== Issues ===
1. Please add a line for the tar command used to create the tarball from the
svn export.
Since the issue is a very minor thing, I will go ahead and approve the package;
I trust you to change it on your initial commit.
*** 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 801680] Review Request: picketbox - Security framework for Java Applications
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801680 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||802182 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 730227] Review Request: jboss-transaction-1.1-api - Transaction 1.1 API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730227 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||802182 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 802182] Review Request: ironjacamar - Java Connector Architecture 1.6 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=802182 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends on||801614, 730227, 801865, ||801680 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801865] Review Request: jboss-transaction-spi - JBoss Transaction SPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=801865 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||802182 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 801614] Review Request: jboss-connector-1.6-api - Java EE Connector Architecture 1.6 API 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=801614 Ricardo Arguello ricardo.argue...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||802182 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 791312] Review Request: jexcelapi - A Java API to read, write and modify Excel spreadsheets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=791312 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||jexcelapi-2.6.12-3.fc17 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:42:17 EDT --- jexcelapi-2.6.12-3.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800414] Rename request: mingw32-pthreads - mingw-pthreads
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800414 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:45:34 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:45:34 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800430] Rename request: mingw32-libpng - mingw-libpng
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800430 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:46:11 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:46:11 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800434] Rename request: mingw32-libssh2 - mingw-libssh2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800434 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:46:22 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:46:22 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800387] Rename request: mingw32-gettext - mingw-gettext
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800387 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:45:04 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:45:04 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800393] Rename request: mingw32-gtkhtml3 - mingw-gtkhtml3
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800393 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:45:26 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:45:26 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800379] Rename request: mingw32-fontconfig - mingw-fontconfig
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800379 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:44:47 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:44:47 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800427] Rename request: mingw32-libffi - mingw-libffi
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800427 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:45:55 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:45:55 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800389] Rename request: mingw32-glib2 - mingw-glib2
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800389 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:45:09 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:45:09 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 800375] Rename request: mingw32-curl - mingw-curl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=800375 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:44:37 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:44:37 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 673786] Rename Request: mingw32-binutils - mingw-binutils - Cross-compiled version of binutils for Win32 and Win64 environments
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=673786 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:44:13 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:44:13 EDT --- mingw-SDL-1.2.13-14.fc17, mingw-SDL_image-1.2.12-4.fc17, mingw-SDL_mixer-1.2.11-7.fc17, mingw-atk-2.3.93-1.fc17, mingw-atkmm-2.22.6-2.fc17, mingw-binutils-2.22.52-3.fc17, mingw-boost-1.48.0-6.fc17, mingw-bzip2-1.0.5-12.fc17, mingw-cairo-1.10.2-10.fc17, mingw-cairomm-1.10.0-5.fc17, mingw-celt051-0.5.1.3-8.fc17, mingw-cppunit-1.12.1-9.fc17, mingw-crt-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-curl-7.20.1-7.fc17, mingw-dbus-1.4.6-5.fc17, mingw-dirac-1.0.2-8.fc17, mingw-dlfcn-0-0.12.r11.fc17, mingw-enchant-1.6.0-4.fc17, mingw-expat-2.0.1-11.fc17, mingw-filesystem-95-3.fc17, mingw-fontconfig-2.8.0-6.fc17, mingw-freeglut-2.6.0-0.5.rc1.fc17, mingw-freetype-2.4.8-4.fc17, mingw-gcc-4.7.0-0.9.20120224.fc17, mingw-gdbm-1.8.0-9.fc17, mingw-gdk-pixbuf-2.25.2-4.fc17, mingw-gettext-0.18.1.1-7.fc17, mingw-glib-networking-2.31.16-2.fc17, mingw-glib2-2.31.20-1.fc17, mingw-glibmm24-2.31.2-4.fc17, mingw-gnutls-2.12.14-6.fc17, mingw-gstreamer-0.10.35-5.fc17, mingw-gtk-vnc-0.5.0-6.fc17, mingw-gtk2-2.24.10-4.fc17, mingw-gtkhtml3-3.32.2-7.fc17, mingw-gtkmm24-2.24.2-5.fc17, mingw-headers-2.0.999-0.5.trunk.20120224.fc17, mingw-hunspell-1.3.2-5.fc17, mingw-jasper-1.900.1-17.fc17, mingw-libffi-3.0.11-0.1.rc2.fc17, mingw-libgcrypt-1.4.4-9.fc17, mingw-libgeotiff-1.3.0-0.5.svn1664.fc17, mingw-libglade2-2.6.4-12.fc17, mingw-libglademm24-2.6.7-15.fc17, mingw-libgnurx-2.5.1-11.fc17, mingw-libgpg-error-1.6-17.fc17, mingw-libidn-1.14-12.fc17, mingw-libltdl-2.4-6.fc17, mingw-libogg-1.1.4-6.fc17, mingw-liboil-0.3.16-6.fc17, mingw-libp11-0.2.8-4.fc17, mingw-libpng-1.5.7-3.fc17, mingw-libsigc++20-2.2.10-5.fc17, mingw-libsigsegv-2.6-5.fc17, mingw-libsoup-2.37.90-2.fc17, mingw-libsqlite3x-20071018-15.fc17, mingw-libssh2-1.1-10.fc17, mingw-libtiff-3.9.5-6.fc17, mingw-libvirt-0.9.10-4.fc17, mingw-libxml++-2.34.2-5.fc17, mingw-libxml2-2.7.8-6.fc17, mingw-libxslt-1.1.26-8.fc17, mingw-libzip-0.9-6.fc17, mingw-matahari-0.5.0-1.fc17.4, mingw-nsis-2.46-7.fc17, mingw-openjpeg-1.3-9.fc17, mingw-opensc-0.12.2-4.fc17, mingw-openssl-1.0.0d-5.fc17, mingw-p11-kit-0.10-3.fc17, mingw-pango-1.29.5-3.fc17, mingw-pangomm-2.28.3-5.fc17, mingw-pcre-8.10-8.fc17, mingw-pdcurses-3.4-11.fc17, mingw-pixman-0.24.4-2.fc17, mingw-plotmm-0.1.2-13.fc17, mingw-portablexdr-4.9.1-7.fc17, mingw-proj-4.6.1-8.fc17, mingw-pthreads-2.8.0-20.20110511cvs.fc17, mingw-qpid-cpp-0.14-3.fc17, mingw-qt-4.8.0-7.fc17, mingw-qwt-5.2.1-7.fc17, mingw-readline-5.2-11.fc17, mingw-sigar-1.6.5-0.8.git58097d9.fc17, mingw-sqlite-3.7.9-4.fc17, mingw-srvany-1.0-8.fc17, mingw-tcl-8.5.11-4.fc17, mingw-termcap-1.3.1-12.fc17, mingw-tk-8.5.9-6.fc17, mingw-webkitgtk-1.7.5-6.fc17, mingw-wpcap-4.1.final2-6.fc17, mingw-xerces-c-3.1.1-5.fc17, mingw-zfstream-20041202-13.fc17, mingw-zlib-1.2.5-9.fc17, mingw-nsiswrapper-9-3.fc17, mingw-cxxtest-3.10.1-9.fc17, mingw-crossreport-8-2.fc17, mingw-spice-protocol-0.8.0-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 790553] Review Request: xsom - XML Schema Object Model (XSOM)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=790553 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||xsom-0-5.20110809svn.fc17 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:42:06 EDT --- xsom-0-5.20110809svn.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 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 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||axiom-1.2.12-2.fc17 Resolution|RAWHIDE |ERRATA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:42:44 EDT --- axiom-1.2.12-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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 783066] Review Request: LogService - DIET middleware logging service
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=783066 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version||LogService-2.8.0-1.fc17 Resolution||ERRATA Last Closed||2012-03-11 21:43:59 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org 2012-03-11 21:43:59 EDT --- LogService-2.8.0-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 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
