[Bug 996042] Review Request: tinyxml2 - Simple, small and efficient C++ XML parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=996042 Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | --- Comment #20 from Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi --- Oh didn't notice the branches already exist, but there's nothing built.. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 996042] Review Request: tinyxml2 - Simple, small and efficient C++ XML parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=996042 --- Comment #21 from François Cami f...@fcami.net --- IIRC it needs newer autotools than what we have in RHEL6. A possible fix could be to install newer autotools over RHEL5/6 and then generate the necessary configuration, and include that in Fedora git. I still haven't had the time to try that (and do not even know if that's a way / the best way to do it) but you're certainly welcome if you do. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 926968] Review Request: php-MiniTemplator - Compact template engine for HTML files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=926968 --- Comment #4 from Remi Collet fed...@famillecollet.com --- ping -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 996042] Review Request: tinyxml2 - Simple, small and efficient C++ XML parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=996042 --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- tinyxml2-1.0.11-4.20130805git0323851.el6 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 6. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tinyxml2-1.0.11-4.20130805git0323851.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
[Bug 996042] Review Request: tinyxml2 - Simple, small and efficient C++ XML parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=996042 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- tinyxml2-1.0.11-4.20130805git0323851.el5 has been submitted as an update for Fedora EPEL 5. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/tinyxml2-1.0.11-4.20130805git0323851.el5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969718] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969718
--- Comment #27 from Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com ---
uml: Since user-mode-linux is unavailable for Fedora, the uml subpackage would
be broken anyway, so it cannot be provided.
rpmlint:
- I think the non-conffile-in-etc warning can be ignored, all packages I looked
at don't use %config. However, I've changed from
%{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d/pbuilder
to
%{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d/
since we don't Requires: bash-completion and hence we need to co-own the
directory.
- The hardcoded-library-path errors are ignorable
pbdir: is this worth it for just three entries?
SPEC: http://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/pbuilder.spec
SRPM: http://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/pbuilder-0.215-5.fc21.src.rpm
* Mon Oct 14 2013 Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com - 0.215-5
- Package is noarch
- Co-own %{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d/
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 957346] Review Request: mingw-physfs - MinGW compiled physfs library to provide abstract access to various archives
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957346 Marcel Wysocki m...@satgnu.net changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|971115 | --- Comment #5 from Marcel Wysocki m...@satgnu.net --- Update: %changelog * Mon Oct 14 2013 maci m...@satgnu.net - 2.0.3-4 - remove patch - build without 7zip support, its unlikely mingw-lzma-sdk457 will ever work. Can be re-enabled when xz-devel support is implemented http://icculus.org/pipermail/physfs/2010-December/000971.html Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/maci0/rpmbuild/master/SPECS/mingw-physfs.spec SRPM URL: https://raw.github.com/maci0/rpmbuild/master/SRPMS/mingw-physfs-2.0.3-4.fc19.src.rpm Koji URL: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6057794 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971115 [Bug 971115] Review Request: mingw-lzma-sdk457 - SDK for lzma compression -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 971115] Review Request: mingw-lzma-sdk457 - SDK for lzma compression
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=971115 Marcel Wysocki m...@satgnu.net changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|957346 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=957346 [Bug 957346] Review Request: mingw-physfs - MinGW compiled physfs library to provide abstract access to various archives -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014601] Review Request: python-cssmin - A Python port of the YUI CSS compression algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014601 --- Comment #18 from Martin Krizek mkri...@redhat.com --- Yeah, I tried building it for f20 and rawhide but had no luck. I am not sure why the builds fail in koji, I have no problem building them in mock on my machine. http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6057975 http://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/8022/6058022/build.log -- Any ideas what causes the traceback? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014601] Review Request: python-cssmin - A Python port of the YUI CSS compression algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014601 Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||cicku...@gmail.com --- Comment #19 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com --- Is it compatible with setuptools 0.7+? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Python_setuptools_0.7 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1015775] Review Request: TuxCut - A netcut like application
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1015775 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added Alias||TuxCut -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1015775] Review Request: TuxCut - A netcut like application
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1015775 Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org Summary|Review Request: TuxCut -|Review Request: TuxCut - A |TuxCut is a netcut in |netcut like application |windows os like software | |written in PyQt | --- Comment #12 from Kevin Kofler ke...@tigcc.ticalc.org --- I changed the bug summary to match the one in the specfile. Please also consider: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Trademarks_in_Summary_or_Description Something like in windows os definitely doesn't belong in the summary, but even netcut like is bad, you should instead describe what the software actually does, also because not everyone necessarily knows netcut (I don't). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1017766] Review Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Sans-serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017766 --- Comment #18 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 1017766] Review Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Sans-serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017766 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018384] Review Request: tinyca2 - TinyCA graphical openssl based CA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018384 --- Comment #10 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- No FAS account for owner specified. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018384] Review Request: tinyca2 - TinyCA graphical openssl based CA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018384 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018384] Review Request: tinyca2 - TinyCA graphical openssl based CA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018384 Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||limburg...@gmail.com Flags||needinfo?(limburgher@gmail. ||com) fedora-cvs? --- Comment #11 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- Jon Ciesle: There is an owner specified? pwouters? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018384] Review Request: tinyca2 - TinyCA graphical openssl based CA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018384 --- Comment #12 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Patrick Uiterwijk from comment #11) Jon Ciesle: There is an owner specified? pwouters? Ciesla* -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014601] Review Request: python-cssmin - A Python port of the YUI CSS compression algorithm
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014601 --- Comment #20 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbys...@in.waw.pl --- Try my fix from comment #5 :) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018384] Review Request: tinyca2 - TinyCA graphical openssl based CA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018384 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(limburgher@gmail. | |com)| --- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- The request is misformatted. I think the long description being in the short description field is the problem. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_SCM_admin_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 1018588] Review Request: gssntlmssp - A GSSAPI mechanism for NTLMSSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018588 --- Comment #2 from Simo Sorce sso...@redhat.com --- Argh sorry, I had the old name in the spec, let me regen everything. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018588] Review Request: gssntlmssp - A GSSAPI mechanism for NTLMSSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018588 --- Comment #3 from Simo Sorce sso...@redhat.com --- Replaced spec and srpm, should be correct now. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018542] Review Request: golang-github-jteeuwen-go-bindata - A small utility which generates Go code from any file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018542 --- Comment #1 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- It looks like this one should be built as a binary, non-devel package providing the go-bindata tool, not the code. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018588] Review Request: gssntlmssp - A GSSAPI mechanism for NTLMSSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018588
--- Comment #4 from Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com ---
Drop-by comments:
1. Remove old stuffs:
BuildRoot
rm -rf %{buildroot}
%clean
%defattr(-,root,root,-)
2. I don't think you need to preserve:
### Patches ###
### Dependencies ###
Requires: krb5-libs = 1.11.2
### Build Dependencies ###
Unless you have plenty of files.
3. autoreconf -f -i
--
autoreconf -fiv (verbose?)
4. install -m644
--
install -pm644
5. You install it as perm 644, so drop this:
%attr(0644,root,root) %config(noreplace) /%{_sysconfdir}/gss/mech.ntlmssp
--
%config(noreplace) %{_sysconfdir}/gss/mech.ntlmssp
And remove that slash.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018859] New: Review Request: perl-Term-Clui - Term::Clui Perl module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018859 Bug ID: 1018859 Summary: Review Request: perl-Term-Clui - Term::Clui Perl module Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: k.georg...@atreides.org.uk QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://georgiou.fedorapeople.org//perl-Term-Clui.spec SRPM URL: http://georgiou.fedorapeople.org//perl-Term-Clui-1.68-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: Term::Clui offers a high-level user interface to give the user of command- line applications a consistent look and feel. Its metaphor for the computer is as a human-like conversation-partner, and as each question/response is completed it is summarised onto one line, and remains on screen, so that the history of the session gradually accumulates on the screen and is available for review, or for cut/paste. This user interface can therefore be intermixed with standard applications which write to STDOUT or STDERR, such as make, pgp, rcs etc. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018859] Review Request: perl-Term-Clui - Term::Clui Perl module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018859 --- Comment #1 from Kostas Georgiou k.georg...@atreides.org.uk --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6058648 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018862] New: Review Request: perl-File-SearchPath - Search for a file in an environment variable path
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018862 Bug ID: 1018862 Summary: Review Request: perl-File-SearchPath - Search for a file in an environment variable path Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: k.georg...@atreides.org.uk QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://georgiou.fedorapeople.org//perl-File-SearchPath.spec SRPM URL: http://georgiou.fedorapeople.org//perl-File-SearchPath-0.06-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: This module provides the ability to search a path-like environment variable for a file (that does not necessarily have to be an executable). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018862] Review Request: perl-File-SearchPath - Search for a file in an environment variable path
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018862 --- Comment #1 from Kostas Georgiou k.georg...@atreides.org.uk --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6058658 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Review passed, with the caveat that the Go packaging guidelines are draft and this package may need revision in the future. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014353] Review Request: php-lightopenid - PHP OpenID library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014353
Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||puiterw...@redhat.com
--- Comment #10 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com ---
Obviously :
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
Please read: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:PHP
Requires: php = 5.1.2
= A PHP library must not have an explicit Requires on php or httpd..
From phpcompatinfo report should be
Requires: php(language) = 5.1.2 (but this one have no interest)
Requires: php-curl
Requires: php-pcre
%{_datadir}/lightopenid
= Non-PEAR PHP software which provides shared libraries should put its PHP
source files for such shared libraries in a subfolder of /usr/share/php
Fixed in 0.6-2
[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
So ? no link to upstream request or bug report ?
This is in upstream since 2013, I just requested them to make a new release:
http://code.google.com/p/lightopenid/issues/detail?id=75
[!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
So ?
Ok, the package have been fixed, but this is not traced here.
This is already fixed: cp -p preserved timestamps.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018871] Review Request: perl-Term-ShellUI - Fully-featured shell-like command line environment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018871 --- Comment #1 from Kostas Georgiou k.georg...@atreides.org.uk --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6058717 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018871] New: Review Request: perl-Term-ShellUI - Fully-featured shell-like command line environment
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018871 Bug ID: 1018871 Summary: Review Request: perl-Term-ShellUI - Fully-featured shell-like command line environment Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: k.georg...@atreides.org.uk QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://georgiou.fedorapeople.org//perl-Term-ShellUI.spec SRPM URL: http://georgiou.fedorapeople.org//perl-Term-ShellUI-0.92-1.fc19.src.rpm Description: Term::ShellUI uses the history and autocompletion features of Term::ReadLine to present a sophisticated command-line interface to the user. It tries to make every feature that one would expect to see in a fully interactive shell trivial to implement. You simply declare your command set and let ShellUI take care of the heavy lifting. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018501] Review Request: golang-bitbucket-kardianos-osext - Provides extra OS functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018501 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- The summary and description are kind of vague. I suggest Summary: Extensions to the standard Go os package %description devel Provides extensions to the standard Go os package, including Executable, which returns an absolute path which can be used to re-invoke the current program, and ExecutableFolder, which returns the directory containing the same. This package contains library source intended for building other packages which use these functions. --- Also, I'm not sure if you have this already, but this is a dep of coreos/go-log/log and not etcd proper. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016943] Review Request: crystal - KDE WM theme (KDE4-compatible version)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016943 --- Comment #5 from Ben Nemec bne...@redhat.com --- Yes, I would be happy to help maintain it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review+ |fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Whoops, I missed something. This should have BuildRequires: golang-bitbucket-kardianos-osext-devel -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1018501 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018501 [Bug 1018501] Review Request: golang-bitbucket-kardianos-osext - Provides extra OS functions -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018501] Review Request: golang-bitbucket-kardianos-osext - Provides extra OS functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018501 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1018523 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 [Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1018533 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 [Bug 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1014353] Review Request: php-lightopenid - PHP OpenID library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1014353 --- Comment #11 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- *** Bug 1018855 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 --- Comment #4 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Also BuildRequires: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-devel -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1018523 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 [Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1017766] Review Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Sans-serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017766 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 1017766] Review Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Sans-serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017766 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- google-crosextra-caladea-fonts-1.002-0.1.20130214.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/google-crosextra-caladea-fonts-1.002-0.1.20130214.fc20 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969718] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969718
--- Comment #28 from Sergio Monteiro Basto ser...@serjux.com ---
(In reply to Sandro Mani from comment #27)
uml: Since user-mode-linux is unavailable for Fedora, the uml subpackage
would be broken anyway, so it cannot be provided.
I think we should pack it , it is a work that we advance , when user-mode-linux
, we can try install it with an rpm , though
rpmlint:
- I think the non-conffile-in-etc warning can be ignored, all packages I
looked at don't use %config. However, I've changed from
%{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d/pbuilder
to
%{_sysconfdir}/bash_completion.d/
since we don't Requires: bash-completion and hence we need to co-own the
directory.
OK
- The hardcoded-library-path errors are ignorable
pbdir: is this worth it for just three entries?
yes , but not important.
Since Oron doesn't reply , please create other request review , and mark this
one as duplicated, I will approve your review , and I will ask to be add as
co-maintainer .
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018057] Review Request: golang-googlecode-goprotobuf - Go support for Google protocol buffers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018057 --- Comment #7 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Note: 1. Should the docs go with base package or devel subpackage? (currently going with base) Base is okay if the devel package depends on the base. (Which it might as well.) 2. with base package:- Requires: protobuf (not entirely sure) Yes, because it doesn't make sense without. 3. Installing only the binary and not the .a archives (for now) Right. 4. Current location of protoc-gen-go binary is /usr/bin, but README suggests $GOPATH/bin I tested it and that's okay. It just needs to be in the developer's $PATH ultimately. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018057] Review Request: golang-googlecode-goprotobuf - Go support for Google protocol buffers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018057 --- Comment #8 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Also note that this one is a dependency of go-raft, not etcd directly. (That doesn't affect this spec file, just noting.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1017766] Review Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Sans-serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017766 --- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- google-crosextra-caladea-fonts-1.002-0.1.20130214.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/google-crosextra-caladea-fonts-1.002-0.1.20130214.fc19 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018057] Review Request: golang-googlecode-goprotobuf - Go support for Google protocol buffers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018057 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1018540 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018540 [Bug 1018540] Review Request: golang-github-goraft-raft - A Go implementation of the Raft distributed consensus protocol -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018540] Review Request: golang-github-goraft-raft - A Go implementation of the Raft distributed consensus protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018540 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1018057 Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Should have BuildRequires: golang-googlecode-goprotobuf-devel Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018057 [Bug 1018057] Review Request: golang-googlecode-goprotobuf - Go support for Google protocol buffers -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523
--- Comment #5 from Vincent Batts vba...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Matthew Miller from comment #4)
BuildRequires: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-devel
Use the import paths:
BuildRequires: golang('github.com/coreos/go-systemd')
with the actual import paths needed. This way it will be safe guarded for
splitting out the libraries into subpackages.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 996042] Review Request: tinyxml2 - Simple, small and efficient C++ XML parser
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=996042 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |ON_QA Resolution|ERRATA |--- Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- tinyxml2-1.0.11-4.20130805git0323851.el5, cppcheck-1.62-1.el5 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 5 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 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523
--- Comment #6 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Vincent Batts from comment #5)
(In reply to Matthew Miller from comment #4)
BuildRequires: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-devel
Use the import paths:
BuildRequires: golang('github.com/coreos/go-systemd')
with the actual import paths needed. This way it will be safe guarded for
splitting out the libraries into subpackages.
Sure, works for me. Can you put this in the packaging draft?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Go
However, there is a side-effect of doing it this way -- when looking for
packages which build-require a certain library for security update, the import
path will have to be used, which seems more error-prone. See the repoquery in
the security section at the end of the draft... unless you can think of
something more clever I think it may come down to a tradeoff of the safeguard
you have in mind vs. making it easier to manage security problems
Anyway the important note *here* is the requirement, however it is expressed.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018384] Review Request: tinyca2 - TinyCA graphical openssl based CA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018384 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? | -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 989960] Review Request: qtdbf - DBF viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=989960 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version|qtdbf-0.9.9-3.fc18 |qtdbf-0.9.9-3.el6 --- Comment #28 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- qtdbf-0.9.9-3.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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018384] Review Request: tinyca2 - TinyCA graphical openssl based CA
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018384 --- Comment #14 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Unsetting flag. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018905] New: Review Request: scap-security-guide - Security guidance and baselines in SCAP formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018905 Bug ID: 1018905 Summary: Review Request: scap-security-guide - Security guidance and baselines in SCAP formats Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: jlies...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jlieskov/scap-security-guide.spec SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jlieskov/scap-security-guide-0.1-2.fc19.src.rpm Description: The scap-security-guide project provides security configuration guidance in formats of the Security Content Automation Protocol (SCAP). It provides a catalog of practical hardening advice and links it to government requirements where applicable. The project bridges the gap between generalized policy requirements and specific implementation guidance. Fedora Account System Username: jlieskov -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018540] Review Request: golang-github-goraft-raft - A Go implementation of the Raft distributed consensus protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018540 --- Comment #3 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- (Or the equivalent golang([import path]) virtual provides.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com 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 1018905] Review Request: scap-security-guide - Security guidance and baselines in SCAP formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018905 Yohan Graterol yohangratero...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||yohangratero...@gmail.com --- Comment #1 from Yohan Graterol yohangratero...@gmail.com --- Hello Jan, To Fedora you need remove the line rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT after macro %install %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT The installation is made by root %defattr(-,root,root,-) That is not necessary. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 --- Comment #7 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Lokesh points out that a buildrequires isn't really what's needed. What we need is a _regular_ Requires, because the dependency will need to be installed in order for anything to build against this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018905] Review Request: scap-security-guide - Security guidance and baselines in SCAP formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018905 Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||negativ...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 from Simone Caronni negativ...@gmail.com --- Hello, also the following are not needed for Fedora: - %clean section - BuildRoot tag - Group tag Actually they are now required only for RHEL 5 packages. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Review passed. As with other Go packages, this is with the caveat that updates to the draft guidelines may require packaging changes in the near future. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018501] Review Request: golang-bitbucket-kardianos-osext - Provides extra OS functions
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018501 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(l...@redhat.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 1018540] Review Request: golang-github-goraft-raft - A Go implementation of the Raft distributed consensus protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018540 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(l...@redhat.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 1018540] Review Request: golang-github-goraft-raft - A Go implementation of the Raft distributed consensus protocol
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018540 --- Comment #4 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- Actually should be Requires, not BuildRequires. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018905] Review Request: scap-security-guide - Security guidance and baselines in SCAP formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018905 --- Comment #3 from Jan Lieskovsky jlies...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Yohan Graterol from comment #1) Hello Jan, To Fedora you need remove the line rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT after macro %install %install rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT The installation is made by root %defattr(-,root,root,-) That is not necessary. Thanks Yohan, applied your proposals. Submitted new versions of both the spec and source RPM package at: Spec URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jlieskov/scap-security-guide.spec (afbe8a9815c030f924518d5d1be141fecb2eb430) SRPM URL: http://fedorapeople.org/~jlieskov/scap-security-guide-0.1-2.fc19.src.rpm (3d6c46153c94b983ef86fe83844e52698c320fcf) Regards, Jan. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018542] Review Request: golang-github-jteeuwen-go-bindata - A small utility which generates Go code from any file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018542 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(l...@redhat.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 1018926] New: Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018926 Bug ID: 1018926 Summary: Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: manisan...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: nott...@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/pbuilder.spec SRPM URL: http://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/pbuilder-0.215-5.fc21.src.rpm Description: Personal package builder for Debian packages Fedora Account System Username: smani -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 969718] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=969718 Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2013-10-14 13:37:39 --- Comment #29 from Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com --- *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1018926 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018926] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018926 Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||o...@actcom.co.il --- Comment #1 from Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com --- *** Bug 969718 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016508] Review Request: faketime - Report faked system time to programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016508 Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added CC||pwout...@redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi --- *** Bug 1018626 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018626] Review Request: libfaketime - Manipulate system time per process for testing purposes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018626 Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED CC||susi.leht...@iki.fi Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2013-10-14 13:39:30 --- Comment #4 from Susi Lehtola susi.leht...@iki.fi --- This is a duplicate of bug #1016508. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1016508 *** -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018926] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018926 Sergio Monteiro Basto ser...@serjux.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ser...@serjux.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ser...@serjux.com 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 1018926] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018926 --- Comment #2 from Sandro Mani manisan...@gmail.com --- Sergio: Concerning the UML discussion started in bug 969718: the subpackage is little work (basically everything that is currently excluded in the %files section) goes into the uml subpackage. But since I see little signs that uml will be offered on fedora in the near future, I'd rather avoid the spec clutter. However, if you feel that it is something you definitely want to see, then I'll add the package in commented form. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018057] Review Request: golang-googlecode-goprotobuf - Go support for Google protocol buffers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018057
Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||l...@redhat.com
Flags||needinfo?(l...@redhat.com)
--- Comment #9 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com ---
This one looks good except either
Option A: The -devel package should Require the base package. (Requires:
%{name} = %{version}-%{release})
Option B: Since there's no real hard requirement, don't do that, but instead
include the documentation in the devel package as well as in the base.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018542] Review Request: golang-github-jteeuwen-go-bindata - A small utility which generates Go code from any file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018542 --- Comment #2 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- The above also implies that the package should be go-bindata, not the longer import-path-based name. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018926] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018926 --- Comment #3 from Sergio Monteiro Basto ser...@serjux.com --- fedora-review and rpmlint, warns in small details, no blockers. package APPROVED ! Please, add me to scm request as co-maintainer 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 1018926] Review Request: pbuilder - Personal package builder for Debian packages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018926 Sergio Monteiro Basto ser...@serjux.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |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 1018511] Review Request: golang-github-ccding-go-config-reader - A configuration file reader in golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018511 Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||l...@redhat.com Flags||needinfo?(l...@redhat.com) --- Comment #1 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- etcd 0.1.2 drops this as a dependency. We can close this one as wontfix if you like. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016508] Review Request: faketime - Report faked system time to programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016508 Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||puiterw...@redhat.com --- Comment #4 from Patrick Uiterwijk puiterw...@redhat.com --- Please note: 1. The upstream name is libfaketime, so as per Packaging Policies, you need to take that name for the package: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming 2. Version 0.9.5 has been released, please package the latest 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 1018523] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-log - A golang library for logging to systemd
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018523 --- Comment #8 from Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com --- %changelog * Mon Oct 14 2013 Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com 0-0.3.git840af6b - Requires kardianos/osext and coreos/go-systemd Spec URL: http://lsm5.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/SPECS/golang-github-coreos-go-log.spec SRPM URL: http://lsm5.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/SRPMS/golang-github-coreos-go-log-0-0.3.git840af6b.fc21.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 1018517] Review Request: tanukiwrapper - Java service wrapper
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018517 Sam Kottler skott...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Last Closed||2013-10-14 14:45:04 --- Comment #1 from Sam Kottler skott...@redhat.com --- This package is already in Fedora, it's called java-service-wrapper now so I'm closing out this request for package 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 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #2 from Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd Short Description: Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs Owners: lsm5 Branches: f19 f20 el6 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 1016508] Review Request: libfaketime - Report faked system time to programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016508 Dhiru Kholia dkho...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: faketime - |Review Request: libfaketime |Report faked system time to |- Report faked system time |programs|to programs --- Comment #5 from Dhiru Kholia dkho...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://bitbucket.org/dhiru/packages/raw/master/faketime/libfaketime.spec SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/dhiru/packages/raw/master/faketime/libfaketime-0.9.5-1.fc20.src.rpm I have updated 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 1018511] Review Request: golang-github-ccding-go-config-reader - A configuration file reader in golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018511 Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(l...@redhat.com) | --- Comment #2 from Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com --- Matt: should we still go ahead with this in case some other package decides to use it? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016807] Review Request: tubo - Library to thread process std-in/std-err/std-out from fork() child
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016807 Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mario.blaetterm...@gmail.co ||m Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com --- Scratch build for Rawhide: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6059678 $ rpmlint -i -v * tubo.src: I: checking tubo.src: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo.src: W: strange-permission tubo-5.0.7.tar.gz 0600L A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions. Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions. tubo.src: I: checking-url http://sourceforge.net/projects/xffm/files/libtubo/tubo-5.0.7.tar.gz (timeout 10 seconds) tubo.armv7hl: I: checking tubo.armv7hl: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo.i686: I: checking tubo.i686: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo.x86_64: I: checking tubo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo-debuginfo.armv7hl: I: checking tubo-debuginfo.armv7hl: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo-debuginfo.armv7hl: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/tubo-5.0.7/src/tubo_static.i The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. tubo-debuginfo.armv7hl: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/tubo-5.0.7/src/tubo.c The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. tubo-debuginfo.i686: I: checking tubo-debuginfo.i686: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/tubo-5.0.7/src/tubo_static.i The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. tubo-debuginfo.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/tubo-5.0.7/src/tubo.c The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. tubo-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking tubo-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/tubo-5.0.7/src/tubo_static.i The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. tubo-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/tubo-5.0.7/src/tubo.c The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. tubo-devel.armv7hl: I: checking tubo-devel.armv7hl: W: summary-not-capitalized C tubo headers and development-related files Summary doesn't begin with a capital letter. tubo-devel.armv7hl: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo-devel.armv7hl: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. tubo-devel.armv7hl: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/tubo.h The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file, possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF. tubo-devel.i686: I: checking tubo-devel.i686: W: summary-not-capitalized C tubo headers and development-related files Summary doesn't begin with a capital letter. tubo-devel.i686: I: checking-url http://xffm.org/libtubo.html (timeout 10 seconds) tubo-devel.i686: W: no-documentation The package contains no documentation (README, doc, etc). You have to include documentation files. tubo-devel.i686: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/include/tubo.h The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file,
[Bug 1016508] Review Request: libfaketime - Report faked system time to programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016508 --- Comment #6 from Paul Wouters pwout...@redhat.com --- I've been closely collaberating with upstream who sent me the 0.9.5 pre-release and we have been looking at various fixes he put in the final 0.9.5. It does not matter to me who owns the package, but see the 32bit work around and the PREFIX and LIBDIRNAME that were added on my request to upstream in the 0.9.5 package. My spec file is references in the now closed duplicate review ticket (see above) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016508] Review Request: libfaketime - Report faked system time to programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016508
--- Comment #7 from Paul Wouters pwout...@redhat.com ---
I see this spec file installs the libraries in the system path, and not in a
separate /usr/lib{64}/faketime directory. I don't think this library belongs in
the system path as you never want programs to accidentally pick it up.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 853553] Review Request: guayadeque - Audio player and organizer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=853553 MartinKG mgans...@alice.de changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|needinfo?(mgans...@alice.de | |) | --- Comment #55 from MartinKG mgans...@alice.de --- Spec URL: http://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SPECS/guayadeque.spec SRPM URL: http://martinkg.fedorapeople.org/Review/SRPMS/guayadeque-0.3.6-14.svn1885.fc19.src.rpm %changelog * Mon Oct 14 2013 Martin Gansser marti...@fedoraproject.org - 0.3.6-14.svn1885 - rebuild - corrected url address hi christoper you are welcome. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1017766] Review Request: google-crosextra-caladea-fonts - Sans-serif font metric-compatible with Cambria font
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1017766 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #21 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- google-crosextra-caladea-fonts-1.002-0.1.20130214.fc20 has been pushed to the Fedora 20 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 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 --- Comment #3 from Peter Lemenkov lemen...@gmail.com --- Btw defattr(...) directive should be removed. This isn't needed anymore since Fedora Core 6 / RHEL 5 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016807] Review Request: tubo - Library to thread process std-in/std-err/std-out from fork() child
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016807
--- Comment #4 from Mario Blättermann mario.blaetterm...@gmail.com ---
Still one more issue, though.
%dir %{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/lib%{name}
%{_datadir}/gtk-doc/html/lib%{name}/*
In this case the whole folder path /usr/share/gtk-doc/html would stay unowned.
No problem, you could simply add Requires: gtk-doc and all is fine. That
package is quite small and doesn't eat up a lot of disk space. But it has a
disadvantage, it pulls a lot of dependencies, and gtk-doc is actually not
needed for libtubo at runtime. In such cases, it is allowed and usual to co-own
the whole folder %{_datadir}/gtk-doc and don't require gtk-doc at all. I can't
find the appropriate guideline for the time being, just have a look at the
first entry of the associated tracking bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169#c0
And last but not least, a wrong comment has crept in your spec:
## Remove static libs
find $RPM_BUILD_ROOT -name '*.la' -delete
The same as in your librfm review ticket, you know what to do ;)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018511] Review Request: golang-github-ccding-go-config-reader - A configuration file reader in golang
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018511 --- Comment #3 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Lokesh Mandvekar from comment #2) Matt: should we still go ahead with this in case some other package decides to use it? It's up to you. I'm inclined to skip the work unless there's a good reason, epecially since we may have to update a bunch of these as we update standards. So my recommendation is to close this as WONTFIX -- we can reopen later if need be. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 --- Comment #4 from Matthew Miller mat...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Peter Lemenkov from comment #3) Btw defattr(...) directive should be removed. This isn't needed anymore since Fedora Core 6 / RHEL 5 I thought the EPEL guidelines still called for it, but I'm not seeing that now. The Fedora guidelines just mention it as not necessary (but also not forbidden). So, whatever Lokesh prefers. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016508] Review Request: libfaketime - Report faked system time to programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016508 --- Comment #8 from Paul Wouters pwout...@redhat.com --- from upstream: Closer towards 0.9.5, all the dlsym()-based code was re-written and this patch was no longer considered necessary. Therefore, it'd be good to know whether someone found a system that still has this endless loop problem. This would deserve some more attention then. So I think the patch is a leftover that should be removed from the 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 908116] Review Request: openshift-origin-console - The OpenShift Management Console
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908116 --- Comment #12 from Troy Dawson tdaw...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/openshift-origin/openshift-origin-console.spec SRPM URL: http://tdawson.fedorapeople.org/openshift-origin/openshift-origin-console-1.10.2.2-2.fc20.src.rpm - Updated to latest stable version - Added Requires and BuildRequires for systemd functions - Cleaned up odd permissions on apache owned files and directories - Tested to make sure it built on rawhide -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1016807] Review Request: tubo - Library to thread process std-in/std-err/std-out from fork() child
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016807
--- Comment #5 from Antonio Trande anto.tra...@gmail.com ---
A file that you listed to include in your package has strange permissions.
Usually, a file should have 0644 permissions.
Fixed.
The Free Software Foundation address in this file seems to be outdated or
misspelled. Ask upstream to update the address, or if this is a license file,
possibly the entire file with a new copy available from the FSF.
https://sourceforge.net/p/xffm/support-requests/2/
In such cases, it is allowed and usual to co-own the whole folder %
{_datadir}/gtk-doc and don't require gtk-doc at all. I can't find the
appropriate guideline for the time being, just have a look at the first entry
of the associated tracking bug:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=604169#c0
Something like that is debated is the Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#The_directory_is_owned_by_a_package_which_is_not_required_for_your_package_to_function
In this way it should be okay:
Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/libtubo/tubo.spec
SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/libtubo/tubo-5.0.7-2.fc19.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 1016508] Review Request: libfaketime - Report faked system time to programs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1016508 --- Comment #9 from Dhiru Kholia dkho...@redhat.com --- (In reply to Paul Wouters from comment #8) from upstream: Closer towards 0.9.5, all the dlsym()-based code was re-written and this patch was no longer considered necessary. Therefore, it'd be good to know whether someone found a system that still has this endless loop problem. This would deserve some more attention then. Without this patch, I see segfaults during the make test phase on Fedora 20 64-bit. So I guess that this patch is still needed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1018533] Review Request: golang-github-coreos-go-systemd - Go bindings to systemd socket activation, journal and D-BUS APIs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018533 --- Comment #5 from Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com --- %changelog * Mon Oct 14 2013 Lokesh Mandvekar l...@redhat.com 0-0.2.git68bc612 - provides golang(github.com/coreos/go-systemd) - defattr removed Spec URL: http://lsm5.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/SPECS/golang-github-coreos-go-systemd.spec SRPM URL: http://lsm5.fedorapeople.org/rpmbuild/SRPMS/golang-github-coreos-go-systemd-0-0.2.git68bc612.fc21.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 1018588] Review Request: gssntlmssp - A GSSAPI mechanism for NTLMSSP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1018588 --- Comment #5 from Simo Sorce sso...@redhat.com --- Copied new spec and srpm files on the above URLs with the requested fixes (hopefully understood them all the right way). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
