[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 --- Comment #3 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru --- I can make a review for your package. Can you take my package review process? https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037 librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868939] Review Request: python-llfuse - Python Bindings for the low-level FUSE API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868939 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868939] Review Request: python-llfuse - Python Bindings for the low-level FUSE API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868939 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-llfuse-0.37.1-9.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-llfuse-0.37.1-9.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868939] Review Request: python-llfuse - Python Bindings for the low-level FUSE API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868939 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-llfuse-0.37.1-9.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-llfuse-0.37.1-9.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867211] Review Request: jglobus-myproxy - Java MyProxy client library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867211 Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-01 06:23:29 --- Comment #1 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se --- The jglobus-myproxy source has now been merged into the main jglobus source at github, so a separate source package is no longer necessary. The next upstream release of jglobus will contain the myproxy support. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737401] Review Request: saga - Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737401 --- Comment #26 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at --- Hooray, thanks a lot for your patience! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819951] Review Request: ostree - Linux-based operating system develop/build/deploy tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819951 --- Comment #19 from Colin Walters walt...@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #18) I added a new repository format, it's only in git at the moment. I'll do a new ostree release soon. Done: http://fedorapeople.org/~walters/ostree/ostree.spec http://fedorapeople.org/~walters/ostree/ostree-2012.12-1.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737401] Review Request: saga - Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737401 Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #27 from Volker Fröhlich volke...@gmx.at --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: saga Short Description: Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata Owners: volter Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737401] Review Request: saga - Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737401 --- Comment #28 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868528] Review Request: perl-ZMQ-Constants - Constants for the libzmq library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868528 --- Comment #2 from Jose Pedro Oliveira j...@di.uminho.pt --- New files uploaded: http://um-pe09-2.di.uminho.pt/fedora/perl-ZMQ-Constants-1.01-2.fc17.src.rpm http://um-pe09-2.di.uminho.pt/fedora/perl-ZMQ-Constants.spec -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821233] Review Request: vdr-live - An interactive web interface for VDR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821233
Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mru...@redhat.com
--- Comment #15 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com ---
%{vdr_apiversion} is used through the spec, but never defined. Interesting!
Esp.
Requires: vdr(abi)%{?_isa} = %{vdr_apiversion}
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855843] Review Request: mina-ftpserver - A 100% pure Java FTP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855843 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it --- tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4646143 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 855843] Review Request: mina-ftpserver - A 100% pure Java FTP server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=855843 gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868528] Review Request: perl-ZMQ-Constants - Constants for the libzmq library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868528
Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ppi...@redhat.com ---
Spec file changes:
--- perl-ZMQ-Constants.spec.old 2012-10-20 18:21:57.0 +0200
+++ perl-ZMQ-Constants.spec 2012-11-01 11:53:52.0 +0100
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
Name: perl-ZMQ-Constants
Version:1.01
-Release:1%{?dist}
+Release:2%{?dist}
Summary:Constants for the libzmq library
License:GPL+ or Artistic
@@ -10,8 +10,11 @@
BuildArch: noarch
+BuildRequires: perl(Cwd)
BuildRequires: perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)
BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
+BuildRequires: perl(Carp)
+BuildRequires: perl(Storable)
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval `%{__perl} -V:version`; echo
$version))
@@ -28,10 +31,9 @@
make %{?_smp_mflags}
%install
-make pure_install PERL_INSTALL_ROOT=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+make pure_install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -type f -name .packlist -exec rm -f {} \;
-find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2/dev/null \;
%{_fixperms} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/*
@@ -46,6 +48,9 @@
%changelog
+* Thu Nov 1 2012 Jose Pedro Oliveira jpo at di.uminho.pt - 1.01-2
+- Handle comment #1 items of the review ticket #868528.
+
* Sat Oct 20 2012 Jose Pedro Oliveira jpo at di.uminho.pt - 1.01-1
- Update to 1.01.
TODO: Remove explicit deleting empty directories from %install section. This
is not
needed anymore (perl-ZMQ-Constants.spec:34).
-find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -depth -type d -exec rmdir {} 2/dev/null \;
Ok.
TODO: Replace PERL_INSTALL_ROOT with DESTDIR argument at make install. Modern
Makefile.PL recognizes DESTDIR (perl-ZMQ-Constants.spec:31).
%install
-make pure_install PERL_INSTALL_ROOT=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
+make pure_install DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
Ok.
FIX: Remove bundled inc/* modules and build-require
`perl(inc::Module::Install)'
instead of `perl(ExtUtils::MakeMaker)', or specify all dependencies needed for
bundled inc/* modules.
+BuildRequires: perl(Cwd)
Ok.
TODO: Build-require `perl(base)' for running tests (lib/ZMQ/Constants.pm:3).
Not addressed. Ok.
TODO: Build-require `perl(Exporter)' for running tests
(lib/ZMQ/Constants.pm:3).
Not addressed. Ok.
FIX: Build-require `perl(Carp)' for running tests (lib/ZMQ/Constants.pm:4).
+BuildRequires: perl(Cwd)
Ok.
TODO: Build-require `perl(contstant)' for running tests
(lib/ZMQ/Constants.pm:99).
Not addressed. Ok.
TODO: Build-require `perl(Storable)' for running tests
(lib/ZMQ/Constants/V3_1_2.pm:4).
+BuildRequires: perl(Storable)
Ok.
$ rpmlint perl-ZMQ-Constants.spec
../SRPMS/perl-ZMQ-Constants-1.01-2.fc19.src.rpm
../RPMS/noarch/perl-ZMQ-Constants-1.01-2.fc19.noarch.rpm
perl-ZMQ-Constants.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libzmq - Librium
perl-ZMQ-Constants.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libzmq -
Librium
perl-ZMQ-Constants.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) libzmq - Librium
perl-ZMQ-Constants.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libzmq -
Librium
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.
rpmlint is Ok.
Package builds in F19
(http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4646281). Ok.
Please consider implementing the not-addressed `TODO' items before building
this package.
Resolution: Package APPROVED.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||872020 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 872020] Review Request: ocaml-tplib - Tropical Polyhedra Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872020 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||870522 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868940] Review Request: s3ql - Full-Featured File System for Online Data Storage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868940 --- Comment #5 from Marcel Wysocki m...@satgnu.net --- Update: Spec URL: http://maci.satgnu.net/rpmbuild/SPECS/s3ql.spec SRPM URL: http://maci.satgnu.net/rpmbuild/SRPMS/s3ql-1.12-4.fc17.src.rpm Koji URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4646462 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4646480 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821233] Review Request: vdr-live - An interactive web interface for VDR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821233
--- Comment #16 from MartinKG mgans...@alice.de ---
(In reply to comment #15)
%{vdr_apiversion} is used through the spec, but never defined. Interesting!
Esp.
Requires: vdr(abi)%{?_isa} = %{vdr_apiversion}
good morning Matthias, and what is this ?
[martin@localhost ~]$ cat -v /etc/rpm/macros.vdr |grep vdr_apiversion
%vdr_apiversion %vdr_pcvar apiversion
[martin@localhost ~]$ rpm -qf /etc/rpm/macros.vdr
vdr-devel-1.7.31-1.fc18.x86_64
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869120] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_DAVACL - DAVACL plugin for SabreDAV.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869120 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #636692||review+ Flags|| --- Comment #3 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de --- Created attachment 636692 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=636692action=edit review == APPROVED == -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869120] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_DAVACL - DAVACL plugin for SabreDAV.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869120 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821233] Review Request: vdr-live - An interactive web interface for VDR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821233 --- Comment #17 from Matthias Runge mru...@redhat.com --- Ah, I must have skipped that build requirement. Sorry for the noise. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 --- Comment #4 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com --- Sure, I'm happy to swap reviews. Thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869121] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_CalDAV - CalDAV plugin for Sabre_DAV
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869121 --- Comment #3 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de --- Created attachment 636695 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=636695action=edit review == APPROVED == -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869121] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_CalDAV - CalDAV plugin for Sabre_DAV
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869121 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871037] Review Request: librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037 Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||loganje...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com --- I will take this review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869123] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_CardDAV - CardDAV plugin for Sabre_DAV
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869123 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869123] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_CardDAV - CardDAV plugin for Sabre_DAV
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869123 --- Comment #3 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de --- Created attachment 636708 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=636708action=edit review == APPROVED == -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869119] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_VObject - An intuitive reader for iCalendar and vCard objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869119 --- Comment #3 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de --- Created attachment 636710 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=636710action=edit review == APPROVED == -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869119] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_VObject - An intuitive reader for iCalendar and vCard objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869119 Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 869119] Review Request: php-sabredav-Sabre_VObject - An intuitive reader for iCalendar and vCard objects
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869119 --- Comment #4 from Gregor Tätzner gre...@freenet.de --- minor this doesn't look right: Requires: php-common = 5 you can drop the min version -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857705] Review Request: dataquay - Simple RDF for C++ and Qt applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857705 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #7 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Okay then. ACK! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871604] Review Request: fedup - fedora upgrade tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871604 Will Woods wwo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-01 11:31:27 --- Comment #5 from Will Woods wwo...@redhat.com --- imported and built: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=363855 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=363854 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871605] Review Request: fedup-dracut - the Fedora Upgrade tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871605 Will Woods wwo...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-11-01 11:32:50 --- Comment #5 from Will Woods wwo...@redhat.com --- URLs fixed, warnings fixed, source uploaded, package built: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=363856 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821233] Review Request: vdr-live - An interactive web interface for VDR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821233 --- Comment #18 from MartinKG mgans...@alice.de --- (In reply to comment #14) I built it using koji first then used the prebuilt binaries to review. you should use for q.e. for a local review the following command, take the flags -m fedora-18-x86_64 or -m fedora-rawhide for the target arch $ fedora-review -p -r -m fedora-rawhide -n vdr-live-0.2.0-7.20121009git.fc18.src.rpm are you sponsored an can you finish the review ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821233] Review Request: vdr-live - An interactive web interface for VDR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821233 --- Comment #19 from Sourav Basu sourav.t...@yahoo.com --- (In reply to comment #18) (In reply to comment #14) I built it using koji first then used the prebuilt binaries to review. you should use for q.e. for a local review the following command, take the flags -m fedora-18-x86_64 or -m fedora-rawhide for the target arch $ fedora-review -p -r -m fedora-rawhide -n vdr-live-0.2.0-7.20121009git.fc18.src.rpm I will take a look into it surely. are you sponsored an can you finish the review ? I mentioned earlier that I am not with the packagers group- so I am not sponsored. Am doing informal reviews to get sponsored. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871037] Review Request: librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037
--- Comment #4 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com ---
First, I notice that the configure output shows some things missing that
actually do exist in Fedora. These *could* be added as BuildRequires, although
I recognize you may have reasons for not wishing to do so: libguess-devel,
db4-devel, libtranslate-devel, aspell.
Second, there is a compiler warning that probably should not be ignored:
rccstring.c: In function 'rccStringFixID':
rccstring.c:67:44: warning: array subscript is above array bounds
[-Warray-bound
s]
This warning points to an off-by-one error. This line:
memcpy(lang, header-language, 2); lang[3] = 0;
should really be this:
memcpy(lang, header-language, 2); lang[2] = 0;
Third, the unused direct shared library dependency warnings from rpmlint can be
eliminated by adding this to the %configure line: LDFLAGS=-Wl,--as-needed
$RPM_LD_FLAGS.
Fourth, another option for the Source0 download URL is Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/rusxmms/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 (see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.net). (I'm not
saying you have to switch, just that sourceforge is a known quantity when it
comes to downloads.)
Finally, see the items marked [!] below. They are all SHOULD items, not MUST
items, but if they can be taken care of without undue effort, we should do so.
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig called in %post and %postun if required.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
LGPL (with incorrect FSF address), Unknown or generated, *No
copyright* Public domain. 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /home/jamesjer/871037-librcc/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: CheckResultdir
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note:
[Bug 857705] Review Request: dataquay - Simple RDF for C++ and Qt applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857705 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #8 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me --- Super, thanks! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: dataquay Short Description: Simple RDF for C++ and Qt applications Owners: salimma Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819951] Review Request: ostree - Linux-based operating system develop/build/deploy tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819951
--- Comment #20 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me ---
Odd, I did a re-review just before you posted 2012.12, and distinctly recalled
posting it, but now it's gone. Either there was a Bugzilla problem or the
request timed out in my browser without me noticing.
Most issues are still valid, please see the (blessedly short) issues list at
the top of the review.
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
[!]: Package installs properly.
Red herring - linux-user-chroot is not pushed to F-18 yet.
When releasing this, both should be pushed out in the same update
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines
[!]: 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.
The COPYING* files must, and README.md and TODO files should, be
listed as %doc
[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[!]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
Note: %define enable_embedded_dependencies 0 %define build_name ostree-
embeddeps %define build_name ostree %define embedded_dependencies_option
--enable-embedded-dependencies %define embedded_dependencies_option
%{nil}
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[!]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
GPL (v2 or later), LGPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address),
Unknown or generated. 3 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in
/home/michel/sources/fedora/reviews/819951-ostree/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[!]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s)
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[!]: Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: CheckResultdir
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Sources used to build
[Bug 857705] Review Request: dataquay - Simple RDF for C++ and Qt applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857705 --- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 841483] Review Request: kde-plasma-mail-checker - Plasmoid for checking a new messages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=841483 --- Comment #17 from Fl@sh kaperan...@gmail.com --- New successfull build: Spec: https://raw.github.com/F1ash/plasmaMailChecker/18f665a433d68a4796ac84846cdc426dbbc698ba/kde-plasma-mail-checker.spec SRPM: http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/7263/4647263/kde-plasma-mail-checker-1.8.47-1.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856238] Review Request: scratch - Programming language learning environment for stories, games, music and art
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856238 --- Comment #16 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me --- Any update re: the squeak-vm situation? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871037] Review Request: librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037
--- Comment #5 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru ---
(In reply to comment #4)
First, I notice that the configure output shows some things missing that
actually do exist in Fedora. These *could* be added as BuildRequires,
although I recognize you may have reasons for not wishing to do so:
libguess-devel, db4-devel, libtranslate-devel, aspell.
I will think about this. Before I need more knowledges about this posibilites.
So I built a library with only thats requires which I enough good understand.
Second, there is a compiler warning that probably should not be ignored:
rccstring.c: In function 'rccStringFixID':
rccstring.c:67:44: warning: array subscript is above array bounds
[-Warray-bound
s]
This warning points to an off-by-one error. This line:
memcpy(lang, header-language, 2); lang[3] = 0;
should really be this:
memcpy(lang, header-language, 2); lang[2] = 0;
Thanks! I will forward this to upstream.
Third, the unused direct shared library dependency warnings from rpmlint can
be eliminated by adding this to the %configure line:
LDFLAGS=-Wl,--as-needed $RPM_LD_FLAGS.
Hm...
Fourth, another option for the Source0 download URL is Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/rusxmms/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 (see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.net). (I'm
not saying you have to switch, just that sourceforge is a known quantity
when it comes to downloads.)
Sourceforge hasn't librcc-0.2.9.tar.gz so I use dside.dyndns.org.
I will request to an author to use sourceforge for all sources.
[!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified.
In really the author allready known about this and he promised to update librcc
on the next week.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871037] Review Request: librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037 --- Comment #6 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru --- So do you approve the package? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868939] Review Request: python-llfuse - Python Bindings for the low-level FUSE API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868939 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868939] Review Request: python-llfuse - Python Bindings for the low-level FUSE API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868939 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- python-llfuse-0.37.1-9.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 --- Comment #5 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru --- It's weird for me ocaml-zarith doesn't provide debuginfo package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 --- Comment #6 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru --- Group is unspecified. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 872320] New: Review Request: maven-patch-plugin - Maven Patch Plugin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872320 Bug ID: 872320 QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org Severity: medium Version: rawhide Priority: medium CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Summary: Review Request: maven-patch-plugin - Maven Patch Plugin Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Linux Reporter: mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se Type: --- Documentation: --- Hardware: All Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: Package Review Product: Fedora Spec URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/maven-patch-plugin.spec SRPM URL: http://www.grid.tsl.uu.se/review/maven-patch-plugin-1.1.1-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: The Patch Plugin is used to apply patches to source files. Fedora Account System Username: ellert -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870719] Review Request: horst - A highly optimized radio scanning tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870719 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870719] Review Request: horst - A highly optimized radio scanning tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870719 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- horst-3.0-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/horst-3.0-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870719] Review Request: horst - A highly optimized radio scanning tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870719 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- horst-3.0-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/horst-3.0-1.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #11 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org --- (In reply to comment #5) Done. Whenever you change something, please bump the release and add a changelog entry. We should be at 0.0.2.4-2 now. (In reply to comment #6) 1) On the Packaging:Guidelines wiki I read: ... desktop-file-install MUST be used if the package does not install the file or there are changes desired to the .desktop file so maybe I must also add 'desktop-file-install' apart from 'desktop-file-check'. No, one is enough, either desktop-file-install or desktop-file-check 2) I don't know if the %post %postun scriptlet are necessary in this case. What should they be needed for? And this is not about the %files section either. Mario already pointed out one of the problems with the %files section: You are hardcoding the languages. Whenever a new translation is added, the build will fail. %find_lang does not work because the locales are in /usr/share/locale-langpack. This is wrong. Can you try patching the package to use /usr/share/locale instead? Hint: I had a similar problem and solved it with sed, see line 45-50 at http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rednotebook.git/tree/rednotebook.spec?id=de7097c1#n45 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868940] Review Request: s3ql - Full-Featured File System for Online Data Storage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868940 --- Comment #6 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- $ rpmlint -i -v * s3ql.src: I: checking s3ql.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de - DE, ed, d The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. s3ql.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US snapshotting - snaps hotting, snaps-hotting, snapshot ting The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. s3ql.src: I: checking-url http://code.google.com/p/s3ql/ (timeout 10 seconds) s3ql.src:24: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 24) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. s3ql.src: I: checking-url http://s3ql.googlecode.com/files/s3ql-1.12.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) s3ql.src: W: invalid-url Source0: http://s3ql.googlecode.com/files/s3ql-1.12.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or FTP URL. s3ql.i686: I: checking s3ql.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de - DE, ed, d The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. s3ql.i686: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US snapshotting - snaps hotting, snaps-hotting, snapshot ting The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. s3ql.i686: I: checking-url http://code.google.com/p/s3ql/ (timeout 10 seconds) s3ql.i686: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/s3ql/_deltadump.so _deltadump.so A shared object soname provides is provided by a file in a path from which other packages should not directly load shared objects from. Such shared objects should thus not be depended on and they should not result in provides in the containing package. Get rid of the provides if appropriate, for example by filtering it out during build. Note that in some cases this may require disabling rpmbuild's internal dependency generator. s3ql.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql_backup Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-fsck_db Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-expire_backups Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-benchmark Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.i686: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-pcp Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.x86_64: I: checking s3ql.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US de - DE, ed, d The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. s3ql.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US snapshotting - snaps hotting, snaps-hotting, snapshot ting The value of this tag appears to be misspelled. Please double-check. s3ql.x86_64: I: checking-url http://code.google.com/p/s3ql/ (timeout 10 seconds) s3ql.x86_64: W: private-shared-object-provides /usr/lib64/python2.7/site-packages/s3ql/_deltadump.so _deltadump.so()(64bit) A shared object soname provides is provided by a file in a path from which other packages should not directly load shared objects from. Such shared objects should thus not be depended on and they should not result in provides in the containing package. Get rid of the provides if appropriate, for example by filtering it out during build. Note that in some cases this may require disabling rpmbuild's internal dependency generator. s3ql.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql_backup Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-fsck_db Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-expire_backups Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-benchmark Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary s3ql-pcp Each executable in standard binary directories should have a man page. s3ql-debuginfo.i686: I: checking s3ql-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url http://code.google.com/p/s3ql/ (timeout 10 seconds) s3ql-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking s3ql-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://code.google.com/p/s3ql/ (timeout 10 seconds) s3ql.spec:24: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 24) The specfile mixes use of spaces and tabs for indentation, which is a cosmetic annoyance. Use either spaces or tabs for indentation, not both. s3ql.spec: I: checking-url http://s3ql.googlecode.com/files/s3ql-1.12.tar.bz2 (timeout 10 seconds) s3ql.spec: W: invalid-url Source0: http://s3ql.googlecode.com/files/s3ql-1.12.tar.bz2 HTTP Error 404: Not Found The value should be a valid, public HTTP, HTTPS, or
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #12 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #6) 2) I don't know if the %post %postun scriptlet are necessary in this case. Normally, you have to update the desktop database only if the desktop file has a MimeType key: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop-database -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 810676] Review Request: aws - Ada Web Server (Web framework for Ada)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=810676 Björn Persson bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(pa...@zhukoff.net ||) --- Comment #35 from Björn Persson bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se --- I'm now reviewing this package: http://landgraf.fedorapeople.org/packages/requested/aws/aws-2.11.0-10.fc17.src.rpm Three issues remain: 1: build_aws.gpr still contains -lz in one place. 2: aws-devel still doesn't require zlib-ada-devel. 3: gcc-gnat is still missing from the build dependencies. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870860] Review Request: opencsg - Library for Constructive Solid Geometry using OpenGL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870860
--- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
PLease don't bother with false positive rpmlint warnings and drop the docs from
the -devel package. All the files are present anyway due to the main package.
Patch1 is actually not needed, you have just to inform the upstream folks about
the wrong FSF address. However, if you want to patch the source files, don't
patch license.txt. It's somewhat critical to touch license texts, I would
discourage you to do so, and it is not allowed by the guidelines anyway:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Common_Rpmlint_issues#incorrect-fsf-address
mv lib/* %{buildroot}/%{_libdir}/
doesn't keep the timestamps, why not use cp -p or even install -D instead?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 849380] Review Request: python-carbon - Back-end data caching and persistence daemon for Graphite
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=849380 --- Comment #8 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Just a reminder... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 829580] Review Request: python-traitsui - User interface tools designed to complement Traits
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829580 --- Comment #5 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Any news...? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #13 from Christoph Wickert cwick...@fedoraproject.org --- Mario, we have two new packager candidates here, we should not make it too easy for them. ;) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 732577] Review Request: c-icap - An icap server implementation
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=732577 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m --- Comment #2 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Please provide directly clickable download links instead of these Gitorious ones. It's annoying to click through a couple of weblinks and to discover that the files (especially the srpm) are not reachable this way. BTW, your spec looks fine for the time being, could become a quick review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871092] Review Request: updf - Application to write to PDF
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #14 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #13) Mario, we have two new packager candidates here, we should not make it too easy for them. ;) OK, I will be silent from now on ;) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870725] Review Request: sucrack - A su cracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870725 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870725] Review Request: sucrack - A su cracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870725 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- sucrack-1.2.3-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sucrack-1.2.3-1.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870725] Review Request: sucrack - A su cracker
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870725 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- sucrack-1.2.3-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/sucrack-1.2.3-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 871037] Review Request: librcc - RusXMMS Charset Conversion Library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871037
--- Comment #7 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #5)
I will think about this. Before I need more knowledges about this
posibilites. So I built a library with only thats requires which I enough
good understand.
Sure, I understand.
Thanks! I will forward this to upstream.
Let's patch the bug for Fedora, also, so Fedora users don't suffer its
(admittedly unknown) consequences.
Third, the unused direct shared library dependency warnings from rpmlint can
be eliminated by adding this to the %configure line:
LDFLAGS=-Wl,--as-needed $RPM_LD_FLAGS.
Hm...
I don't understand your reply. I actually did a build with the modified
%configure line I proposed, and it worked fine. Eliminating unused library
links is a good thing; for example, it reduces address space pressure on 32-bit
builds.
Fourth, another option for the Source0 download URL is Source0:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/rusxmms/%{name}-%{version}.tar.bz2 (see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.net). (I'm
not saying you have to switch, just that sourceforge is a known quantity
when it comes to downloads.)
Sourceforge hasn't librcc-0.2.9.tar.gz so I use dside.dyndns.org.
I will request to an author to use sourceforge for all sources.
This works for me:
$ wget http://downloads.sourceforge.net/rusxmms/librcc-0.2.9.tar.bz2
So it looks like librcc-0.2.9.tar.bz2 is already there.
(In reply to comment #6)
So do you approve the package?
I would first like to see a modified spec file with (a) a patch for the
off-by-one error, and (b) unused direct dependencies on shared libraries
eliminated (whether using -Wl,--as-needed or some other mechanism).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 868528] Review Request: perl-ZMQ-Constants - Constants for the libzmq library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=868528 Jose Pedro Oliveira j...@di.uminho.pt changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Jose Pedro Oliveira j...@di.uminho.pt --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: perl-ZMQ-Constants Short Description: Constants for the libzmq library Owners: jpo Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: perl-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 --- Comment #7 from Jerry James loganje...@gmail.com --- (In reply to comment #5) It's weird for me ocaml-zarith doesn't provide debuginfo package. No OCaml package does. Our toolchain can't handle OCaml source files yet, even though the OCaml compiler does produce usable debug information with version 4.00.0 and later. I hope we can have debuginfo packages in the not-too-distant future, but right now it isn't possible. (In reply to comment #6) Group is unspecified. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Group_tag. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 829580] Review Request: python-traitsui - User interface tools designed to complement Traits
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=829580 --- Comment #6 from Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com --- I thought I filed an issue on this, but apparently not. Just did: https://github.com/enthought/traitsui/issues/87 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 769958] Review Request: eqp - Automated theorem prover for first-order equational logic
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=769958 --- Comment #6 from John C Peterson j...@eskimo.com --- Of course, it's not over until 'the fat lady sings, but a bit of encouraging news on the license issue that is currently holding things up with legal. I managed to get in contact with the group at Argonne National Laboratory where the (now deceased) EQP author was employed during most of the time it was being developed. We had a couple e-mail exchanges, and I think I sucessfully communicated to them what the issues were regarding the copyright. I don't know how long it will take to get clarification, but they have graciously agreed to look into it. In the meantime, I removed the defattr tag as requested. Here are the updated SPEC, SRPM files: Spec URL: http://jcp.fedorapeople.org/eqp.spec SRPM URL: http://jcp.fedorapeople.org/eqp-09e-3.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 859713] Review Request: php-cloudfiles - PHP API for the Cloud Files storage system
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=859713 Joseph Marrero jmarr...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmarr...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jmarr...@gmail.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737401] Review Request: saga - Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737401 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737401] Review Request: saga - Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737401 --- Comment #29 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- saga-2.0.8-5.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/saga-2.0.8-5.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 737401] Review Request: saga - Geographic information system with an API for processing geodata
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737401 --- Comment #30 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- saga-2.0.8-5.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/saga-2.0.8-5.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 856002] Review Request: plug - Linux software for Fender Mustang amplifiers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856002 --- Comment #8 from Jonathan Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com --- Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jgu/plug.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jgu/plug-1.1-6.fc17.src.rpm * Tue Oct 16 2012 Jonathan G. Underwood jonathan.underw...@gmail.com - 1.1-6 - Change udev rules to be systemd conformant (See BZ 856002 comment 6) - No longer created the plugdev group - Drop unneeded README.Fedora file -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857639] Review Request: duff - Quickly find duplicate files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857639 --- Comment #12 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- I've built duff against the sha libs, here the spec and SRPM, I grateful a final review please SPEC:http://echevemaster.fedorapeople.org/duff/4/duff.spec SRPM: http://echevemaster.fedorapeople.org/duff/4/duff-0.5.2-4.fc17.src.rpm Koji Build Rawhide http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4648530 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857639] Review Request: duff - Quickly find duplicate files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857639 --- Comment #13 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 636879 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=636879action=edit Linking to shared library of sha -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857639] Review Request: duff - Quickly find duplicate files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857639 --- Comment #14 from Eduardo Echeverria echevemas...@gmail.com --- Created attachment 636880 -- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=636880action=edit Remove docs of bundle sha -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 864315] Review Request: lonote - Personal Notebook based on Qt Webkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864315 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- lonote-1.8.7-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 864315] Review Request: lonote - Personal Notebook based on Qt Webkit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864315 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870719] Review Request: horst - A highly optimized radio scanning tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870719 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870719] Review Request: horst - A highly optimized radio scanning tool
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870719 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- horst-3.0-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821233] Review Request: vdr-live - An interactive web interface for VDR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821233 --- Comment #20 from Sourav Basu sourav.t...@yahoo.com --- (In reply to comment #18) you should use for q.e. for a local review the following command, take the flags -m fedora-18-x86_64 or -m fedora-rawhide for the target arch $ fedora-review -p -r -m fedora-rawhide -n vdr-live-0.2.0-7.20121009git.fc18.src.rpm [tumu@tumu x86_64]$ fedora-review -p -r -m fedora-18-x86_64 -n vdr-live-0.2.0-7.20121009git.fc18.src.rpm Init command returned error code 1 Installing built package(s) Mock command returned error code 1 Install command returned error code 1 Mock command returned error code 1 Cannot run mock --copyin: ERROR: Could not find required config file: /etc/mock/fedora-18-x86_64.cfg Exception down the road...(logs in ~/.cache/fedora-review.log) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870522] Review Request: ocaml-zarith - OCaml interface to GMP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870522 --- Comment #8 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru --- I've looked at fedora ocaml-* packages. They use Group: Development/Libraries for both main and devel subpackage. Furthemore you can look at https://fedoraproject.org/w/uploads/5/5c/Packaging_OCaml_ocaml-foolib.spec it has Group too. So you should to use such group too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 851267] Review Request: arc-gui-clients - ARC Graphical Clients
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=851267 --- Comment #10 from Mattias Ellert mattias.ell...@fysast.uu.se --- Thanks. New version: Spec URL: http://grid.tsl.uu.se/review/arc-gui-clients.spec SRPM URL: http://grid.tsl.uu.se/review/arc-gui-clients-0.3.1-3.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 818458] Review Request: rubygem-ruby-debug19 - Command line interface (CLI) for ruby-debug-base
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=818458 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- (In reply to comment #11) Hi Mamoru, Thanks for the packages. I see that you already retired rubygem-ruby-debug and rubygem-ruby-debug-base, but could you please also request RelEngs to block the packages? It would be nice to retire and block rubygem-linecache as well. Thank you. I want to do this after F-18 one is pushed into stable, i.e. F-18 beta freeze is over (I also want to block this on F-18). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870631] Review Request: libnatspec - Library for national and language-specific issues
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870631 Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #9 from Ivan Romanov dr...@land.ru --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libnatspec New Branches: el6 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
