[Bug 887148] New: Review Request: clojure-pom-contrib - org.clojure parent POMs
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887148 Bug ID: 887148 Summary: Review Request: clojure-pom-contrib - org.clojure parent POMs Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: punto...@libero.it Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/clojure-pom-contrib.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/clojure-pom-contrib-0.0.26-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: This project defines a parent Maven Project Object Model (POM) for projects contributed to Clojure and built at build.clojure.org. Fedora Account System Username: gil -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RyNWLVhVC8&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857843] Review Request: lessjs - Less.js The dynamic stylesheet language
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857843 --- Comment #2 from Matthias Runge --- Thanks Stephen! Cleaning up is greatly appreciated. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=AdMuaxu760&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887146] New: Review Request: rocoto - Expanded properties file parsing for Google Guice
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887146 Bug ID: 887146 Summary: Review Request: rocoto - Expanded properties file parsing for Google Guice Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: punto...@libero.it Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/rocoto.spec SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/rocoto-6.2-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Rocoto is a small collection of reusable Modules for Google Guice to make easier the task of loading java.util.Properties by reading configuration files. Fedora Account System Username: gil Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4789143 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7uTtvDh7db&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 877985] Review Request: pss - A power-tool for searching inside source code files
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=877985 --- Comment #2 from Kushal Das --- Updated spec and srpm Spec URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/pss.spec SRPM URL: http://kushal.fedorapeople.org/packages/pss-0.35-2.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=nzrQ3SXf8g&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8f3LBMNpzB&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- tw-0.9.4-7.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=5xYsCbqM3E&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886257] Review Request: fedora-upgrade - Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886257 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- fedora-upgrade-18.3-1.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4MHd8Clw7b&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886257] Review Request: fedora-upgrade - Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886257 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=fiUQlYa2Th&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824052] Review Request: fcitx-m17n - M17n Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824052 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=FIKD3Bs5tn&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824052] Review Request: fcitx-m17n - M17n Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824052 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- fcitx-m17n-0.1.3-1.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=HaaDtkYUCX&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824061] Review Request: fcitx-unikey - Vietnamese Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824061 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System --- fcitx-unikey-0.1.1-2.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DSiosH7Jln&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824061] Review Request: fcitx-unikey - Vietnamese Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824061 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Y7Fq1NKInQ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 884876] Review Request: openscad-MCAD - OpenSCAD Parametric CAD Library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884876 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RDwb5BeNJZ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 884876] Review Request: openscad-MCAD - OpenSCAD Parametric CAD Library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=884876 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- openscad-MCAD-0.0-2.20121031git9af89906fa.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. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=zn3CSN9S9F&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886022] Review Request: pyzy - The Chinese PinYin and Bopomofo conversion library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886022 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- pyzy-0.1.0-4.fc17,ibus-pinyin-1.4.99.20120808-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyzy-0.1.0-4.fc17,ibus-pinyin-1.4.99.20120808-2.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WqmVxHnmP5&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886022] Review Request: pyzy - The Chinese PinYin and Bopomofo conversion library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886022 --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- pyzy-0.1.0-4.fc18,ibus-pinyin-1.4.99.20120808-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/pyzy-0.1.0-4.fc18,ibus-pinyin-1.4.99.20120808-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ciqVunLLDi&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886022] Review Request: pyzy - The Chinese PinYin and Bopomofo conversion library
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886022 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QyPCZOC7ch&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878653] Review Request: NetworkManager-l2tp - NetworkManager VPN plugin for l2tp
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878653 --- Comment #21 from Ivan Romanov --- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886773 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=mA8BM7AUts&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887107] Review Request: mingw-shared-mime-info - MinGW build of shared MIME information database
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887107 greg.helli...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-mingw@lists.fedorapr ||oject.org Alias||mingw-sharedmimeinfo -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=M17TEZKXck&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887107] New: Review Request: mingw-shared-mime-info - MinGW build of shared MIME information database
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887107 Bug ID: 887107 Summary: Review Request: mingw-shared-mime-info - MinGW build of shared MIME information database Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: greg.helli...@gmail.com Spec URL: http://dl.thehellings.com/mingw32/shared-mime-info/mingw-shared-mime-info.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.thehellings.com/mingw32/shared-mime-info/mingw-shared-mime-info-1.0-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: This is the freedesktop.org shared MIME info database. Many programs and desktops use the MIME system to represent the types of files. Frequently, it is necessary to work out the correct MIME type for a file. This is generally done by examining the file's name or contents, and looking up the correct MIME type in a database. Fedora Account System Username: greghellings -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=aliPnAIx4u&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887076] Review Request: mingw-libytnef - MinGW build of Shared MIME information database
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887076 greg.helli...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||fedora-mingw@lists.fedorapr ||oject.org Alias||mingw-libytnef -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Eaes59ky36&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878653] Review Request: NetworkManager-l2tp - NetworkManager VPN plugin for l2tp
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878653 --- Comment #20 from Maurice James --- uname -a Linux charon.tierre.net 3.6.7-4.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Nov 20 19:40:01 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gJmuKmMGDQ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878653] Review Request: NetworkManager-l2tp - NetworkManager VPN plugin for l2tp
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878653 Maurice James changed: What|Removed |Added CC||midnightst...@msn.com --- Comment #19 from Maurice James --- The package is failing to install. The error is the following Resolving Dependencies --> Running transaction check ---> Package NetworkManager-l2tp.x86_64 0:0.9.6-2.fc17 will be installed --> Processing Dependency: nm-connection-editor for package: NetworkManager-l2tp-0.9.6-2.fc17.x86_64 --> Finished Dependency Resolution Error: Package: NetworkManager-l2tp-0.9.6-2.fc17.x86_64 (updates) Requires: nm-connection-editor You could try using --skip-broken to work around the problem You could try running: rpm -Va --nofiles --nodigest -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=v2xEvMl6Xc&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 887076] New: Review Request: mingw-libytnef - MinGW build of Shared MIME information database
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887076 Bug ID: 887076 Summary: Review Request: mingw-libytnef - MinGW build of Shared MIME information database Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Reporter: greg.helli...@gmail.com Spec URL: http://dl.thehellings.com/mingw32/libytnef/mingw-libytnef.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.thehellings.com/mingw32/libytnef/mingw-libytnef-1.5-1.fc17.src.rpm Description: TNEF Stream Parser Library, used by "ytnef" to decode TNEF (winmail.dat) streams generated by Microsoft Outlook. Fedora Account System Username: greghellings For some reason the URLs report back as invalid from rpmlint for me, but are actually valid. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cmrIiHafme&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 866265] Review Request: opentrep - C++ API for parsing travel-focused requests
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866265 --- Comment #5 from Denis Arnaud --- Thanks Michael! The package is still waiting for an approval. So, do not hesitate to come forward :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ovD0ZQBhbh&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- tw-0.9.4-7.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tw-0.9.4-7.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=OhkoWIh7br&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System --- tw-0.9.4-7.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tw-0.9.4-7.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Oucibk95Gm&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gCN38i2f6t&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878188] Review Request: qt5-qtbase - Qt5 - QtBase components
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878188 --- Comment #7 from Rex Dieter --- I know, though Kevin (on irc) had a fairly strong opinion to do to it this way too. We've been careful to follow the mailing list discussion, and are fairly certain that our modifications here won't conflict with use of qtchooser. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=gUkShEWBBB&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885390] Review Request: eclipse-hierarchy-plugin - Hierarchy Viewer plugin for Eclipse
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885390 Chris Tyler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ch...@tylers.info --- Comment #1 from Chris Tyler --- This RPM contains prebuilt components and does not have an upstream URL. It is not compliant with https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:EclipsePlugins and cannot be included in Fedora in its current form -- please review those guidelines and update the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=C0qU4Xl3Hw&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885392] Review Request: eclipse-traceview-plugin - Traceview plugin for Eclipse
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885392 Chris Tyler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ch...@tylers.info --- Comment #1 from Chris Tyler --- This RPM contains prebuilt components and does not have an upstream URL. It is not compliant with https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:EclipsePlugins and cannot be included in Fedora in its current form -- please review those guidelines and update the package. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3ed5F53wXQ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 Juan Manuel changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ | Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #20 from Juan Manuel --- Package Change Request == Package Name: tw New Branches: f16 Owners: juanmabc koji build --scratch f16 succeeds. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WbAKl7uqwn&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878188] Review Request: qt5-qtbase - Qt5 - QtBase components
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878188 Erik van Pienbroek changed: What|Removed |Added CC||erik-fed...@vanpienbroek.nl --- Comment #6 from Erik van Pienbroek --- Hi Rex, Upstream developers recently started a thread on the Qt development mailing list about things us downstream packagers should take into account: http://www.mail-archive.com/development@qt-project.org/msg08471.html In the same thread another Qt developer (Thiago) points out that renaming the tools shouldn't be done at all as a new tool will be introduced by the end of this week called 'qtchooser': http://www.mail-archive.com/development@qt-project.org/msg08533.html This tool will act as a centralized qmake wrapper and will support multiple Qt installations (like the native Fedora Linux one and the Fedora MinGW one). There still isn't much known about this tool yet, but I expect it to become available any moment now -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xUOxNuruKM&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 874105] Review Request: qpid-proton - Proton is a high performance, lightweight messaging library
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=874105
--- Comment #5 from Darryl L. Pierce ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> For 0.2-2:
>
> * Summary
> - "Proton is a " on summary is redundant. It is included in Name.
Removed.
> * BuildRequires
> - ruby-devel:
> Currently ruby related things are not included in generated
> binary rpm. Would you check if BR: ruby-devel is really needed?
> (Or is it possible to enable ruby binding?)
We have a Ruby gem for Proton that will be proposed as a separate package.
> * Touching %buildroot in prep
> - "mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{_mandir}" in prep does nothing because
> %buildroot is always removed at the beginning of %install.
Removed.
> * Possibly unneeded commands
> - Is 'echo "_mandir==%{_mandir}"' in install really needed?
No, that's an artifact from when I was writing the spec. I've removed it now.
> ! %defattr (not a blocker)
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/
> Guidelines#File_Permissions
> - %defattr is now not explicitly needed.
>
> * Dependency between subpackages
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/
> Guidelines#Requiring_Base_Package
> - Usually dependency between main <-> sub-packages should be
> (Epoch)-Version-
> Release.arch specific. i.e. usually Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} =
> %{version}-%{release}
> is needed (also in -devel subpackage).
Fixed. Thanks for catching that.
> * Files in -devel packages
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/
> Guidelines#Devel_Packages
> - Unversioned %{_libdir}/libqpid-proton.so should usually be in -devel
> subpackage, not in main package.
Fixed.
> - Would you check if %_includedir/proton/cproton.i is really needed?
It is for anybody who wants to write language bindings for Proton.
> * Directory ownership issue
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/
> Guidelines#File_and_Directory_Ownership
> - Please make it sure that directories created when installing
> binary rpms are correctly owned by the appropriate rpms.
> Currently the following directories are left unowned.
>
> %{proton_datadir}/
> %{proton_datadir}/docs/
> %{proton_datadir}/docs/api-c/
> %{proton_datadir}/docs/api-py/
> %{_includedir}/proton/
Should be done.
Updated SPEC: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qpid-proton.spec
Updated SRPM:
http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qpid-proton-0.2-2.1.fc17.src.rpm
Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4788015
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3iv12VecFQ&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 879365] Review Request: system-config-network - network administration tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879365 --- Comment #3 from Bill Nottingham --- That's a little goofy how you conditionalized the build, but it seems allowable. You should obsolete system-config-network-tui in the new package, though. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cH5gWwZ4Fx&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ 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
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #31 from Michael Schwendt --- > How can I know all the right dependencies ? Only by becoming intimately familiar with the software you want to package, by examining its Python source code, and by using Yum or repoquery to locate needed packages. For example, you can use your favourite search tool to locate "import" statements. Then find out what packages include the needed Python modules. The primary task would be to get the BuildRequires right, so the build doesn't fail and no features, which could be enabled, get disabled. The secondary (and somewhat less important) task would be to complete the run-time dependencies. To mark your package as depending on other packages. > gir1.2-gdkpixbuf-2.0: GDK Pixbuf libraries - introspection GObject --> > gdk-pixbuf2 on Fedora ? Reviewing Debian packages is outside the scope of this package review request. You would need to be familiar with the contents of those packages to tell whether they include Python stuff. What does "gdk-pixbuf2" include that would be needed? $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0/GdkPixbuf-2.0.typelib gdk-pixbuf2-2.26.5-1.fc18.x86_64 Ah! > gir1.2-poppler-0.18: rendering library for PDF based on Xpdf --> > pypoppler on Fedora ? pypoppler on Fedora only provides a Python module "poppler" (lower-case first letter!), but nothing to satisfy: updf.py:from gi.repository import Poppler, Gtk, Gdk, GObject, GdkPixbuf $ rpm -qf /usr/lib64/girepository-1.0/Poppler-0.18.typelib poppler-glib-0.20.2-9.fc18.x86_64 Ah! > BuildRequires: pycairo-devel > BuildRequires: pygobject3-devel > BuildRequires: gdk-pixbuf2-devel Have you added these BuildRequires because building updf failed without them? Do these packages contain Python stuff needed to build updf? If in doubt, examine what's included in those packages. If you follow https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers to step 2.1.8 you could submit a scratch build in the Fedora Build System. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4A93eWtZyi&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867287] Review Request: glite-jobid-api-cpp - C++ API handling gLite jobid
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867287 František Dvořák changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=qxvMt63Xkf&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867282] Review Request: glite-jobid-api-c - C library handling gLite jobid
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867282 František Dvořák changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=S9EcqKEj29&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 867368] Review Request: canl-c - Common Authentication Library for C
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867368 --- Comment #5 from František Dvořák --- Spec URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/canl-c-2.0.3-1/canl-c.spec SRPM URL: http://scientific.zcu.cz/fedora/canl-c-2.0.3-1/canl-c-2.0.3-1.fc19.src.rpm Koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4778917 New version of canl-c. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=puAm5oH6Qa&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 866265] Review Request: opentrep - C++ API for parsing travel-focused requests
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=866265
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt ---
> %dir %{_datadir}/%{name}
> %dir %{_datadir}/%{name}/data
> %dir %{_datadir}/%{name}/data/por
> %{_datadir}/%{name}/data/por/ori_por_public.csv
is simple enough. [There are %files sections that are much more difficult to
read with many more %dir statements and many more explicitly listed files.]
Actually, simplifying the above entries further would present a disadvantage,
*if* one wants to ensure that certain files get packaged. For example,
%{_datadir}/%{name}/
would include *anything*, even an empty directory at %{_datadir}/%{name}.
Imagine you want to make sure that the file
%{_datadir}/%{name}/data/por/ori_por_public.csv gets packaged (or an important
header file that belongs to an API). Well, you could add a corresponding
existance-test to the %check section instead of making the %files section
explicit. But as Denis points out correctly, the build wouldn't fail for files
in the buildroot that were installed by mistake or in a wrong path (without the
packager getting a chance to double-check it). So, there is a use-case for
making %files section more explicit instead of including trees to simplify
them.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=TVObPuEFU8&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 857843] Review Request: lessjs - Less.js The dynamic stylesheet language
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=857843 Stephen Gallagher changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sgall...@redhat.com Blocks||845479 --- Comment #1 from Stephen Gallagher --- I took a look at this and cleaned it up some. This package review is blocking the upgrade of ReviewBoard 1.7, so it's in my interest to get this in shape once the Node.js package lands. Spec: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/lessjs/lessjs.spec SRPM: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/lessjs/lessjs-1.3.1-1.fc18.src.rpm The only real changes here are an upgrade to 1.3.1 and pointing it at a cleaner tarball location. We can't have it point at master because this isn't repeatable (that returns different results every time someone commits to the repo). There's also a bug in the 1.3.1 release that caused it to display the version as 1.3.0 when 'lessc -v' was called, so I fixed that too. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=VkEmaCZ1XN&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 872957] Review Request: php-pear-XML-SVG - API for building SVG documents
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872957 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- php-pear-XML-SVG-1.1.0-2.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WNNSkpam98&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 861923] Review Request: ghc-hs-bibutils - Haskell binding to bibutils
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=861923 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- ghc-hs-bibutils-4.15-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=GJlapEFIVQ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 838775] Review Request: ghc-css-text - CSS parser and renderer
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=838775 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System --- ghc-css-text-0.1.1-1.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=a1J0kfrVVJ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880179] Review Request: libnetfilter_cthelper - User-space infrastructure for connection tracking helpers
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880179 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System --- libnetfilter_cthelper-1.0.0-3.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PahWpSU2WY&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 872957] Review Request: php-pear-XML-SVG - API for building SVG documents
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=872957 --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System --- php-pear-XML-SVG-1.1.0-2.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6QTZOlNUjb&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #19 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xpeWwGLzKU&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=QVOS0M7bkV&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #18 from Juan Manuel --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: tw Short Description: Translate words into different languages Owners: juanmabc Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PrxhMPBJC1&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886846] Review Request: native-platform - Java bindings for various native APIs
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886846 --- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo --- I received an answer from the developer of the library on the type of license applied, ASL 2.0. In the next relase should be available also the license file in the git repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xkdDilI202&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #17 from Rex Dieter --- Looks good, though the tarball changed since comment #15 to include your klipper bit. As upstream, that's a bit your perogative. APPROVED (and sponsored). Move on to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Add_Package_to_Source_Code_Management_.28SCM.29_system_and_Set_Owner -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ivBECsZIrx&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 815018] Review Request: nodejs - javascript fast build framework
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815018 --- Comment #65 from Stephen Gallagher --- Ok, so I'm going to opt for landing 0.9.3 for the moment (as 0.9.4 looks like it may slip until I'm on vacation). I spoke with Toshio earlier today and we discussed that for reasons of expediency we could bend the conflict rules and I could submit the package for review with an explicit Conflicts: line until the other package fixes it. To that end, I've added a versioned Conflicts: to this version of the package so that it will automatically go away (or force an update of the 'node' package) once they put in their rebuild. As discussed above, this version of the package reverts back to the default '/usr/bin/node' naming. Spec: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/nodejs/nodejs.spec SRPM: http://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/nodejs/nodejs-0.9.3-5.fc18.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4787262 So with all this in mind, please review this with the expectation that we're ready to land it! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=NvLpxJevau&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 819344] Review Request: gsbase - A collection of java utility classes
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819344 gil cattaneo changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2012-12-13 13:30:27 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 821283 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4eFHGiNMeo&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821283] Review Request: gsbase - A collection of java utility classes
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821283 --- Comment #1 from gil cattaneo --- *** Bug 819344 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hcrYSvDmqF&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823338] Review Request: rubygem-moneta - unified interface for key/value stores
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823338 --- Comment #5 from Julian C. Dunn --- Thanks Josef. I've updated the spec and SRPM for points 1 and 2. http://fedorapeople.org/~jdunn/rubygem-moneta/rubygem-moneta.spec http://fedorapeople.org/~jdunn/rubygem-moneta/rubygem-moneta-0.6.0-3.fc19.src.rpm Re point 3, I had the same problem with the spec tests. Looks like upstream did a lot more work on the specs after 0.6.0 was released but I couldn't get the ones tagged 0.6.0 to work. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=a9t10zUO8h&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #16 from Juan Manuel --- Very instructive, thanks. * Mon Dec 13 2012 Juan Manuel Borges Caño - 0.9.4-7 - Use GPLv3+. - Omit deprecated stuff like BuildRoot, Group, clean and defattr. - Omit Requires: glibc-common, implicitly pulled by pretty much everything already. - Add tw-config-klipper to files. Spec URL: http://translateword.googlecode.com/files/tw.spec SRPM URL: http://translateword.googlecode.com/files/tw-0.9.4-7.fc17.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=75bkOgYjZX&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 863145] Review Request: listadmin - Command line interface to mailman mailing lists
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863145
Michael Schwendt changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard||NotReady
--- Comment #4 from Michael Schwendt ---
> %build
> make %{?_smp_mflags}
build.log output says:
+ cd listadmin-2.40
+ make -j2
Nothing needs to be done
+ exit 0
Not a big issue, but it's possible to leave the %build section empty. You could
even delete the %build section completely.
If you want to keep running "make" because there is a Makefile, the invocation
should change the default PREFIX=/usr/local to be in sync with the %install
section. "make PREFIX=/usr", else it could happen that the wrong PREFIX would
enter built files, e.g. via substitutions (or compilation for other packages in
general).
> %doc %{_mandir}/man1/listadmin.1.gz
As in comment 2, files below %{_mandir} are marked as %doc automatically. It's
not necessary to use %doc here explicitly.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Q7sL0h8X72&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870496] Review Request: binwalk - Firmware analysis tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870496 --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- binwalk-0.4.5-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/binwalk-0.4.5-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=vN5dyhZkKj&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870496] Review Request: binwalk - Firmware analysis tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870496 Adam Jackson changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2012-12-13 12:44:40 --- Comment #5 from Adam Jackson --- Imported, building now, thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rfudSmRlaC&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ 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
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #30 from Antonio Trande --- source(In reply to comment #29) > Changelog updated and required packages added. > This time I have built updf on a fresh system by using mock (Fedora 16 i386). > > Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/updf.spec > SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/updf-0.0.2.4-6.fc17.src.rpm > > > $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-18-i386/result/*.rpm > updf.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary updf > updf.src: W: invalid-url Source0: updf-0.0.2.4.tar.gz > 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. The link to src.rpm was wrong; sorry. Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/updf.spec SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/updf-0.0.2.4-6.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=BzZgJUiiFp&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ 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
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #29 from Antonio Trande --- Changelog updated and required packages added. This time I have built updf on a fresh system by using mock (Fedora 16 i386). Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/updf.spec SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/updf-0.0.2.4-6.fc17.src.rpm $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-18-i386/result/*.rpm updf.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary updf updf.src: W: invalid-url Source0: updf-0.0.2.4.tar.gz 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6Chyn0rfml&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886257] Review Request: fedora-upgrade - Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886257 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- fedora-upgrade-18.3-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fedora-upgrade-18.3-1.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xb0gUnRqYV&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886257] Review Request: fedora-upgrade - Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886257 --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- fedora-upgrade-18.3-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fedora-upgrade-18.3-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=7GOk2cbFC6&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886257] Review Request: fedora-upgrade - Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886257 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=OGxdHbBiDs&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 878188] Review Request: qt5-qtbase - Qt5 - QtBase components
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878188 --- Comment #5 from Rex Dieter --- Spec URL: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qt5/qt5-qtbase.spec SRPM URL: Description: http://rdieter.fedorapeople.org/rpms/qt5/qt5-qtbase-5.0.0-0.4.rc2.fc18.src.rpm %changelog * Thu Dec 13 2012 Rex Dieter 5.0.0-0.4.rc2 - 5.0-rc2 - initial try at putting non-conflicting binaries in %%_bindir -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=twCR909wcu&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 --- Comment #15 from Rex Dieter --- naming: ok sources: ok md5sum *.bz2 8e0a7c167e357c860601b5348469ad15 tw-0.9.4.tar.bz2 license: close, but... licensecheck -r src src/tw.in.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/tw_mythes.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/cmd.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/mythes.cxx: *No copyright* UNKNOWN src/engines/tw_cache.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/engines/tw_ft.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/engines/tw_share.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/engines/tw_yb.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/engines/tw_local.sh: GPL (v3 or later) src/engines/tw_gt.sh: GPL (v3 or later) 1. MUST: Seems we can use License: GPLv3+ here 2. SHOULD consider omitting deprecated stuff from .spec like BuildRoot: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#BuildRoot_tag Group: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Group_tag %clean: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean %defattr: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#File_Permissions scriptlets: ok macros: ok dependencies: NOT ok 3. MUST: hrm, I can't find it explicitly in the guidelines at the moment, but pretty sure you can safely omit: Requires: glibc-common which is already implicitly pulled in by pretty much everything already. Being not a complicated package, the rest looks good, please look over items 1-3. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pTtdI7jKhV&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823338] Review Request: rubygem-moneta - unified interface for key/value stores
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823338
--- Comment #4 from Josef Stribny ---
1, Please move these files to -doc sub-package (they should not be part of the
main package):
%doc %{gem_instdir}/README
%doc %{gem_instdir}/TODO
2, And exclude gem cache from the package using %exclude macro:
%exclude %{gem_cache}
3, Tests should be part of this spec file alongside with the %check section,
but I played with the upstream specs and they already differ too much to be
tweaked for this version of the gem.
Rpmlint gives me no errors, package builds in mock and the package looks good
otherwise.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ogCXbVUpqf&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885833] Review Request: tw - translate words into different languages
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885833 Rex Dieter changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|rdie...@math.unl.edu Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #14 from Rex Dieter --- i can help finish up the review today (hopefully)... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=rAAlnfH0dl&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886257] Review Request: fedora-upgrade - Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886257 --- Comment #3 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cytKz68gAQ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 885394] Review Request: eclipse-ddms-plugin - DDMS plugin for Eclipse
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=885394 Chris Tyler changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ch...@tylers.info Blocks||177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=PfV4AqjxxW&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886257] Review Request: fedora-upgrade - Upgrade Fedora to next version using yum upgrade
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886257 Miroslav Suchý changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6leOl9bhvw&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 870496] Review Request: binwalk - Firmware analysis tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870496 --- Comment #4 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=er3B1qEJcz&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 880195] Review Request: python-di - Dependency injection library for python unittesters
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=880195
--- Comment #6 from Stanislav Ochotnicky ---
Package Review
==
Key:
[x] = Pass
[!] = Fail
[-] = Not applicable
[?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires
= MUST items =
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 contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
- I'd suggest verifying your git configuration since your email domain is a
bit weird
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: 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.
It doesn't have any docs for that matter...
[-]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: Package complies to the 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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[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]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[x]: Package is not relocatable.
[x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided
in the spec URL.
[x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python:
[-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
See buildrequires guidelines
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot: present but not needed
Buildroot is not needed
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
Since you are the upstream...please add license text to your releases
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[!]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
clean section is not needed any more
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define.
= EXTRA items =
Generic:
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is
arched.
Rpm
[Bug 870496] Review Request: binwalk - Firmware analysis tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=870496 Adam Jackson changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #3 from Adam Jackson --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: binwalk Short Description: Firmware analysis tool Owners: ajax Branches: F18 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=JYpH4KvZF3&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 823338] Review Request: rubygem-moneta - unified interface for key/value stores
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823338 Josef Stribny changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jstri...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jstri...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Josef Stribny --- I will take this for a review. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Hv0syJmQXU&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 879365] Review Request: system-config-network - network administration tool
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=879365 Nils Philippsen changed: What|Removed |Added CC||nphil...@redhat.com --- Comment #2 from Nils Philippsen --- Sorry for the late reply, but my attempts to get rid of autofoo weren't too fruitful, in the end I scrapped that approach and changed the spec file to only build the GUI optionally and disabled that for F-18 and later. (In reply to comment #1) > MUST items: > - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines - OK > - Spec file matches base package name. - OK > - Spec has consistant macro usage. - OK > - Meets Packaging Guidelines. - OK > - License - GPLv2+, via code > - License field in spec matches - OK > - License file included in package - OK > - Spec in American English - OK > - Spec is legible. - OK > - Sources match upstream md5sum: > 0751d4bd7e59c32626ba92fb3c3ff13d9207792b555b2720c61f35eda048ddb5 > system-config-network-1.6.5.tar.bz2 > > ? Can't find upstream. I've uploaded the new 1.6.6 tarball to fedorahosted and put the complete source URL into the spec file. > - Package needs ExcludeArch - N/A > - BuildRequires correct - *** > > glibc-devel and gcc doesn't need to be explicitly listed > In fact, this doesn't compile anything, so they're possibly wrong. Likely. Not even Harald could tell my why they were in. Removed. > The version on the python req can likely be removed Ditto. > - Spec handles locales/find_lang - OK > - Package is code or permissible content. - OK > - Doc subpackage needed/used. - N/A > - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime. - *** > > What happens if the help isn't installed? Perhaps it shouldn't be %doc. They're only used in the GUI, i.e. removed %doc and moved to GUI-only parts which are disabled. > - Headers/static libs in -devel subpackage. - N/A > > - Package is a GUI app and has a .desktop file - OK... until it's removed. Yes :-). Disabled/removed. > - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch. - OK (tested x86_64) > - Package has no duplicate files in %files. - OK > - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own. - OK > - Package owns all the directories it creates. - OK > - No rpmlint output. > > $ rpmlint system-config-network-tui-1.6.5-1.fc18.noarch.rpm > system-config-network-tui.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-iwlib > > OK. > > system-config-network-tui.noarch: W: self-obsoletion > redhat-config-network-tui <= 1.6.5 obsoletes redhat-config-network-tui = > 1.6.5 > > Weird. Shouldn't it be <, not <= ? I removed that ancient cruft. > system-config-network-tui.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary > system-config-network-cmd > system-config-network-tui.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary > system-config-network > system-config-network-tui.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary > system-config-network-tui > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 4 warnings. > > Warnings, OK. > > $ rpmlint system-config-network-1.6.5-1.fc18.noarch.rpm > system-config-network.noarch: W: obsolete-not-provided rp3 > > Hah. Should just remove this. Ditto. > system-config-network.noarch: W: self-obsoletion redhat-config-network <= > 1.6.5 obsoletes redhat-config-network = 1.6.5 > > See above. > > system-config-network.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary > system-control-network > system-config-network.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary > system-config-network-gui > > OK. > > - final provides and requires are sane: *** > > Requires: > > initscripts >= 0:5.99 > > I think we don't need this version any more. Removed version. > python > > Given we have /usr/bin/python in requires (and rpm-python, and dbus-python, > and ...), this is superfluous. Yes. > > Provides: > > internet-config = 0.40-2.1 > isdn-config = 0.18-10.70.1 > netcfg = 2.36-3p.1 > netconf = 0.1-1.1 > netconfig = 0.8.24-1.2.2.1.1 > > These are all *ancient*. Are they still required to be provided? I removed them along with the ancient obsoletes from above. > SHOULD Items: > > - Should build in mock. - OK (tested x86_64) > - Should build on all supported archs - didn't check > - Should function as described. - didn't check > - Should have sane scriptlets. - OK (none) > - Should have subpackages require base package with fully versioned depend. > - OK > - Should have dist tag - OK > - Should package latest version -OK, I guess > > Suggestions: > 1) Don't mark the help as %doc > 2) Change the obsoletes from <= to < > 3) Remove assorted obsoletes provides/requires Find the changed spec file and SRPM (from a scratch build) at: https://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/system-config-network.git/plain/system-config-network.spec?id=a583832940351fa56bc3b9e4b8c1440b451ac957 http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/6656/4786656/system-config-network-1.6.6-1.fc19.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the
[Bug 875213] Review Request: python-cssselect - Parses CSS3 Selectors and translates them to XPath 1.0
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=875213 Ralph Bean changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-12-13 10:34:55 --- Comment #12 from Ralph Bean --- This package appears to have made it in as a part of the following update: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2012-17938/python-cssselect-0.7.1-3.fc18,calibre-0.9.5-2.fc18 I'm closing the ticket as ERRATA. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ByW5AT1ogr&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ 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
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #28 from Antonio Trande --- (In reply to comment #26) > (In reply to comment #23) > > > > > Requires: poppler > > > > Not a Python package, so the sponsor should have asked you to explain why > > you added this. > > > > > Requires: rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2 > > > > Same here. updf is written in Python. Why would it need a Ruby package? > > All dependencies come from upstream but probably I have mixed some of them. > > Required dependencies: > > gir1.2-gtk-3.0, > gir1.2-gdkpixbuf-2.0, > gir1.2-poppler-0.18, > python-cairo I think I have done a lot of confusion with these packages because there are different of package names between Debian and Fedora. gir1.2-gdkpixbuf-2.0: GDK Pixbuf libraries - introspection GObject --> gdk-pixbuf2 on Fedora ? (no rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2, that's an my severe error) gir1.2-poppler-0.18: rendering library for PDF based on Xpdf --> pypoppler on Fedora ? Please, can anyone confirm me about this ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=0MOiVX9Qs2&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886104] Review Request: plexus-component-factories-pom - Plexus Component Factories POM file
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886104 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=lkeAOQWbl8&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886103] Review Request: plexus-root-pom - Plexus Root POM file
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886103 --- Comment #5 from Jon Ciesla --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=WZQZl5WshO&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886103] Review Request: plexus-root-pom - Plexus Root POM file
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886103 Michal Srb changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #4 from Michal Srb --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: plexus-root-pom Short Description: Plexus Root POM file Owners: msrb sochotni mizdebsk Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=RENIU03HTQ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886104] Review Request: plexus-component-factories-pom - Plexus Component Factories POM file
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886104 Michal Srb changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Michal Srb --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: plexus-component-factories-pom Short Description: Plexus Component Factories POM file Owners: msrb sochotni mizdebsk Branches: f17 f18 InitialCC: java-sig -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=hhjjNQK97a&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824052] Review Request: fcitx-m17n - M17n Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824052 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- fcitx-m17n-0.1.3-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fcitx-m17n-0.1.3-1.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=0FOWThHN1E&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824052] Review Request: fcitx-m17n - M17n Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824052 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=TAMPEyUYiw&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824061] Review Request: fcitx-unikey - Vietnamese Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824061 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- fcitx-unikey-0.1.1-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fcitx-unikey-0.1.1-2.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=XEKfwxmjPL&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824061] Review Request: fcitx-unikey - Vietnamese Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824061 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- fcitx-unikey-0.1.1-2.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/fcitx-unikey-0.1.1-2.fc18 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=99bLXU6FoZ&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 824061] Review Request: fcitx-unikey - Vietnamese Engine for Fcitx
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=824061 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ewRjnewlgO&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886903] Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886903 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||760832 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=KHQxzLNDkM&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886903] Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886903 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||886908 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=pTxqcsskoB&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886908] Review Request: xonotic-data - Game data for the Xonotic first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886908 Jon Ciesla changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||886903 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=tqrKchwzLt&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886908] New: Review Request: xonotic-data - Game data for the Xonotic first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886908 Bug ID: 886908 Summary: Review Request: xonotic-data - Game data for the Xonotic first person shooter Product: Fedora Version: 18 Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Reporter: limburg...@gmail.com Description: Xonotic is a fast-paced, chaotic, and intense multiplayer first person shooter, focused on providing basic, old style deathmatches. Data (textures, maps, sounds and models) required to play xonotic. This is a rename/fork of Nexuiz, and will replace it. SPEC: http://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/xonotic/xonotic-data.spec SRPM: http://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/xonotic/xonotic-data-0.6.0-1.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=buVRIlZ5Qt&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886903] New: Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886903 Bug ID: 886903 Summary: Review Request: xonotic - Multiplayer, deathmatch oriented first person shooter Product: Fedora Version: 18 Component: Package Review Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Reporter: limburg...@gmail.com Description: Xonotic is a fast-paced, chaotic, and intense multiplayer first person shooter, focused on providing basic, old style deathmatches. This is a rename/fork of Nexuiz, and will replace it. SPEC: http://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/xonotic/xonotic.spec SRPM: http://fedorapeople.org/~limb/review/xonotic/xonotic-0.6.0-1.fc18.src.rpm -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=Pj3XTJLNWC&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 799702] Review Request: python-ufl - A compiler for finite element variational forms
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=799702 Tomas Radej changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? | Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #8 from Tomas Radej --- Very good. *** APPROVED *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=6M0wLoazdh&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886900] Review Request: arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs - GNU Binutils for cross-compilation for ARM target
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886900 Dan Horák changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||d...@danny.cz Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d...@danny.cz Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=ramUZqQLrw&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886900] Review Request: arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs - GNU Binutils for cross-compilation for ARM target
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886900 Michal Hlavinka changed: What|Removed |Added CC||e...@brouhaha.com --- Comment #2 from Michal Hlavinka --- *** Bug 639661 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3QWviYYnr1&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886900] Review Request: arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs - GNU Binutils for cross-compilation for ARM target
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886900 --- Comment #1 from Michal Hlavinka --- rpmlint is not silent: 1) macros in comments - these are just plain strings used is commented-out URLs, so no ugly macros with side-effects 2) Source0 is not in an URL form, because original tarball has 147 MB and contains just several tarballs - we need just one of them. So, to save space, Source0 is just that tarball and there is comment how and where to obtain it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kLSNvMD1Vy&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 886900] New: Review Request: arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs - GNU Binutils for cross-compilation for ARM target
Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=886900
Bug ID: 886900
Summary: Review Request: arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs - GNU
Binutils for cross-compilation for ARM target
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Component: Package Review
Severity: medium
Priority: medium
Reporter: mhlav...@redhat.com
Spec URL: http://mihlit.cz/smetiste/arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs.spec
SRPM URL:
http://mihlit.cz/smetiste/arm-none-eabi-binutils-cs-2012.09.63-1.fc17.src.rpm
Description:
This is a cross-compilation version of GNU Binutils, which can be used to
assemble and link binaries for the %{target} platform.
This Binutils package is based on the CodeSourcery
%{cs_date}-%{cs_rel} release, which includes improved ARM target
support compared to the corresponding FSF release. CodeSourcery
contributes their changes to the FSF, but it takes a while for them to
get merged. For the ARM target, effectively CodeSourcery is upstream
of FSF.
Fedora Account System Username: mhlavink
Note: This is targeted for bare-metal arm development (st's STM32, atmel's
SAM and similar microcontrollers - like avr. For linux on arm, there is
cross-{binutils,gcc}-arm).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=scEcYOreUd&a=cc_unsubscribe
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853922] Review Request: guacamole - The main Guacamole web application
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853922 --- Comment #9 from Simone Caronni --- (In reply to comment #8) > I'll take it. Many thanks! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xGmN6Kllkn&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ 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
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #27 from Antonio Trande --- source(In reply to comment #24) > (In reply to comment #21) > > The longer version is: This package review has developed into a wrong > > direction. Even if there are "two new packager candidates", there are also > > "two sponsors", who should try to be more helpful. > > (e.g. to > increase the release with every new package). I'm sorry. I'll do that. > > I think the main problem is the software that is packaged here. IHMO it's > not anywhere near inclusion in Fedora: It violates the FHS (at least at the > beginning it was), hardcodes paths and has no proper build system. Not > necessarily the easiest thing to package, especially for new contributors. If you refer to the language hardcodes paths, the patch could be a solution. Or no ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=muYOrpJB36&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ 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
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=871092 --- Comment #26 from Antonio Trande --- (In reply to comment #23) > Which is unfortunate, because reviewers make mistakes, and that would have > been an opportunity to show that you know your stuff. Ok, I understood. I'll be more incisive in future. > > Without adding the needed run-time dependencies to the package, currently > the program crashes early with a clear Python traceback. There are no > automatic RPM dependencies for Python modules [yet], so you need to add them > manually: > > $ rpm -qpR > ./rpmbuild/repodir/fedora-18-build/updf/0.0.2.4-2.fc17/noarch/updf-0.0.2.4-2. > fc18.noarch.rpm > /usr/bin/python > rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 > rpmlib(PartialHardlinkSets) <= 4.0.4-1 > rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > rpmlib(PayloadIsXz) <= 5.2-1 > $ > Ah, so there is another problem besides me. :) How can I know all the right dependencies ? > As one can see, just /usr/bin/python is not sufficient for this program, > because it contains import statements for several other modules. "pycairo" > (for a direct "import cairo" in the source code) and "pygobject3" are just > two that are missing, but may be installed already only because other > packages depend on them. "numpy" is another crucial one. > > Also not forget about users, who start with a minimal installation. Those > actually file related bug reports from time to time. > > > > Requires: poppler > > Not a Python package, so the sponsor should have asked you to explain why > you added this. > > > Requires: rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2 > > Same here. updf is written in Python. Why would it need a Ruby package? All dependencies come from upstream but probably I have mixed some of them. Required dependencies: gir1.2-gtk-3.0, gir1.2-gdkpixbuf-2.0, gir1.2-poppler-0.18, python-cairo -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=xd51i1Gdi6&a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
