[Bug 1161014] Review Request: llvm34 - The Low Level Virtual Machine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1161014 Jens Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #21 from Jens Petersen --- Okay llvm-3.5 is now in F21! ;) Package Change Request == Package Name: llvm34 New Branches: f21 Owners: petersen InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1127636] Review Request: scidavis - Application for Scientific Data Analysis and Visualization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127636 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|ON_QA --- Comment #22 from Fedora Update System --- scidavis-1.D8-6.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1103414] Review Request: js-jquery-migrate - APIs and features removed from jQuery core
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1103414
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tchollingswo...@gmail.com
Flags||needinfo?(tchollingsworth@g
||mail.com)
--- Comment #3 from Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski ---
A quick fedora-review run reveals one issue:
Issues:
===
- Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
Note: warning: File listed twice: /usr/share/javascript/jquery-
migrate/jquery+migrate.js
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#DuplicateFiles
I think you need to specify %dir before:
%{_jsdir}/jquery-migrate
and list the files inside one by one:
%{_jsdir}/jquery-migrate/jquery-migrate.js
%{_jsdir}/jquery-migrate/jquery-migrate.min.js
Licence seems ok (MIT), but it's not specified in any of the source files (not
a blocker).
mock build.log shows some warnings during %build:
Registering "grunt-git-authors" local Npm module tasks.
>> Local Npm module "grunt-git-authors" not found. Is it installed?
and similar for grunt-contrib-watch, grunt-contrib-jshint and
grunt-contrib-qunit.
Are these anything to worry about?
I will try to do a more complete review during the Christmas break.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176455] New: Review Request: libasr - Free, simple and portable asynchronous resolver library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176455 Bug ID: 1176455 Summary: Review Request: libasr - Free, simple and portable asynchronous resolver library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: de...@fateyev.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: http://www.fateyev.com/RPMS/Fedora20/testing/libasr.spec SRPM URL: http://www.fateyev.com/RPMS/Fedora20/testing/SRPMS/libasr-1.0.0-1.fc20.denf.src.rpm Description: Libasr allows to run DNS queries and perform hostname resolutions in a fully asynchronous fashion. The implementation is thread-less, fork-less, and does not make use of signals or other "tricks" that might get in the developer's way. The API was initially developed for the OpenBSD operating system, where it is natively supported. This library is intended to bring this interface to other systems. It is originally provided as a support library for the portable version of the OpenSMTPD daemon, but it can be used in any other contexts. Fedora Account System Username: dfateyev Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8456937 (Rawhide) https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8456948 (Fedora 21) https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8456945 (EPEL 7) https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8456941 (EPEL 6) https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8456963 (EPEL 5) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176452] New: Review Request: nodejs-lazystream - Open Node Streams on demand
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176452 Bug ID: 1176452 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-lazystream - Open Node Streams on demand Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: piotr1...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-lazystream.spec SRPM URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-lazystream-0.1.0-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Create streams lazily when they are accessed (read from/written to). Fedora Account System Username: piotrp -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1128394] Review Request: qcustomplot - Qt widget for plotting and data visualization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128394 Sandro Mani changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #5 from Sandro Mani --- Thank you! New Package SCM Request === Package Name: qcustomplot Short Description: Qt widget for plotting and data visualization Owners: smani Branches: f20 f21 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1170802] Review Request: nodejs-relateurl - Minify URLs by converting them from absolute to relative
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170802 Piotr Popieluch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1176445 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176445 [Bug 1176445] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-angular-templates - Grunt build task to concatenate & register your AngularJS templates -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176445] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-angular-templates - Grunt build task to concatenate & register your AngularJS templates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176445 Piotr Popieluch changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1170802 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1170802 [Bug 1170802] Review Request: nodejs-relateurl - Minify URLs by converting them from absolute to relative -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1175878] Review Request: nodejs-html-minifier - HTML minifier with lint-like capabilities
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175878 Piotr Popieluch changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||1176445 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176445 [Bug 1176445] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-angular-templates - Grunt build task to concatenate & register your AngularJS templates -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176445] Review Request: nodejs-grunt-angular-templates - Grunt build task to concatenate & register your AngularJS templates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176445 Piotr Popieluch changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||1175878 Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1175878 [Bug 1175878] Review Request: nodejs-html-minifier - HTML minifier with lint-like capabilities -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176445] New: Review Request: nodejs-grunt-angular-templates - Grunt build task to concatenate & register your AngularJS templates
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176445 Bug ID: 1176445 Summary: Review Request: nodejs-grunt-angular-templates - Grunt build task to concatenate & register your AngularJS templates Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: piotr1...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Spec URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-grunt-angular-templates.spec SRPM URL: https://piotrp.fedorapeople.org/nodejs-grunt-angular-templates-0.5.7-1.fc21.src.rpm Description: Speed up your AngularJS app by automatically minifying, combining, and automatically caching your HTML templates with $templateCache. Fedora Account System Username: piotrp -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1174097] Review Request: nodebrain - Rule Engine for State and Event Monitoring
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1174097 --- Comment #3 from Ed Trettevik --- Spec URL: http://nodebrain.org/package/nb/version/0.9/release/0.9.03/file/nodebrain-0.9.03-3.spec.txt SRPM URL: http://nodebrain.org/package/nb/version/0.9/release/0.9.03/file/nodebrain-0.9.03-3.fc21.src.rpm Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8455276 Responded to comments seen in other reviews about license and group. Have been including the spec file upstream to support "make rpm", so it has conditionals to attempt conformance with Fedora Packaging Policy as well as multiple versions of other distributions. Hope the conditionals are not too much of an annoyance to reviewers. Can maintain a Fedora specific spec file if preferred. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1128394] Review Request: qcustomplot - Qt widget for plotting and data visualization
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1128394 Mukundan Ragavan changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #4 from Mukundan Ragavan --- My concerns have been addressed. Package APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1161834] Review Request: girl - GNOME Internet Radio Locator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1161834
--- Comment #9 from Ole Aamot ---
girl 0.8.0 ("Cinnamon Girl") is now available.
http://girl.software/girl.spec
http://girl.software/girl-0.8.0-1.src.rpm
http://girl.software/girl-0.8.0-1.x86_64.rpm
Audio playback depends on Totem and audio recording depends on streamripper.
The 36 radio stations supported in girl 0.8.0 are streaming in either MP3, AAC,
or OGG.
If the codec is supported in Totem, Totem will playback the station. If the
codec is not supported in Totem, Totem provide the error message.
I am not going to exclude radio stations in girl/src/stations.xml if that is
required to be included in Fedora 21.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176307] Review Request: torrent-file-editor - Qt based GUI tool designed to create and edit .torrent files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176307 --- Comment #6 from Ivan Romanov --- (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #5) > The torrentfileeditor.nsis file is also not needed for a Fedora package, so > SHOULD be removed also. There is it in packaging guidlines? I couldn't find. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176277] Review Request: Shinobi - Meta build system for Ninja
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176277 --- Comment #4 from Raphael Groner --- Release #2. Spec URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/Shinobi/Shinobi.spec SRPM URL: https://raphgro.fedorapeople.org/review/Shinobi/Shinobi-0.9-2.fc20.src.rpm test builds: http://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/raphgro/Shinobi/build/64643/ -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176307] Review Request: torrent-file-editor - Qt based GUI tool designed to create and edit .torrent files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176307 --- Comment #5 from Raphael Groner --- The torrentfileeditor.nsis file is also not needed for a Fedora package, so SHOULD be removed also. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1172724] Review Request: pyotherside - Asynchronous Python 3 Bindings for Qt 5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1172724
--- Comment #2 from Michal Hlavinka ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/io/thp,
/usr/lib64/qt5/qml/io/thp/pyotherside, /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/io
FAIL
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/io/thp,
/usr/lib64/qt5/qml/io, /usr/lib64/qt5/qml/io/thp/pyotherside
FAIL
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
FAIL: changelog is missing
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[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]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[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.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[!]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
SHOULD: Please include dist tag:
Release: 1%{?dist}
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: 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.
[!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
SHOULD: Please include %check section and run ./tests/tests as described in the
README file
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[Bug 1176307] Review Request: torrent-file-editor - Qt based GUI tool designed to create and edit .torrent files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176307
--- Comment #4 from Raphael Groner ---
Issues:
===
- delete some files in %prep section, they are obviously not needed for a
Fedora package, licensecheck says:
Unknown or generated
torrent-file-editor-0.1.0/.project.el
torrent-file-editor-0.1.0/build-nsis.sh
torrent-file-editor-0.1.0/build.sh
(also the MacOS* file(s) could be removed to not come in the way somehow)
- gtk-update-icon-cache is invoked in %postun and %posttrans if package
contains icons.
Note: icons in torrent-file-editor
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Icon_Cache
===> use also the %posttrans section for gtk-update-icon-cache, is there any
reason to not do here?
- update-desktop-database is invoked in %post and %postun if package contains
desktop file(s) with a MimeType: entry.
Note: desktop file(s) with MimeType entry in torrent-file-editor
See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#desktop-
database
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
"GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 3 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/build/fedora-
review/1176307-torrent-file-editor/licensecheck.txt
===> Please remove those files without any license cause not needed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[?]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
===> Where do you (as upstream) have all the icons from? Are those GPL'ed?
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (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.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one
supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install or desktop-
file-validate if there is such a file.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[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.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in s
[Bug 1147356] Review Request: python-tilestache - A stylish alternative for caching your map tiles
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1147356 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- python-tilestache-1.49.11-3.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176277] Review Request: Shinobi - Meta build system for Ninja
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176277
--- Comment #3 from Raphael Groner ---
(In reply to Ivan Romanov from comment #2)
> sed script in %build section is not the sane. I think here SHOULD be used
> patch.
A patch may neither be of more help here, so I could use my own ninja.build
file in complete. Reported with request for configure to upstream:
https://github.com/Rapptz/Shinobi/issues/1
> What is %{sample} ? How you got this?
> What do diff in %check section?
The sample is copied from the README.md file with a little modification cause I
think there's a bug. This file should generate a ninja.build file for Shinobi
itself, so let's use it as an expectation (renamed reference to be clearer),
compare both in %check section to know if shinobi command works and diff will
report any error.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 690728] Review Request: Nitrate - A test case management system written in Django
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=690728 c...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||c...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|c...@redhat.com -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1074149] Review Request: libepoxy - OpenGL pointer management library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1074149 Dave Airlie changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? --- Comment #15 from Dave Airlie --- Package Change Request == Package Name: libepoxy New Branches: el6 epel7 Owners: airlied InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 1176273] Review Request: andy-super-great-park - 2D arcade game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1176273 --- Comment #5 from MartinKG --- (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #3) > > * SHOULD what is "Plee the Bear"? How is it related to this package? You > won't be able to create two individual subpackges for that 'bear' and > 'bear-factory' stuff. So consider to package that separately and unbundle. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries > > of the Bear Engine for Plee the Bear & Andy's Super Great Park. > there is already a package plee-the-bear for Fedora and only needs to be unbundled. https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/plee-the-bear -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
