[Bug 1901829] Review Request: php-yoast-phpunit-polyfills - Set of polyfills for changed PHPUnit functionality
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901829 Remi Collet changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Remi Collet --- Rawhide scratch build https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=56268454 -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901758] Review Request: python-pyls-spyder - Spyder extensions for the python-language-server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901758
Tomáš Hrnčiar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Tomáš Hrnčiar ---
The package is APPROVED.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package 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]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[x]: 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: No rpmlint messages.
[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 %license.
[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]: 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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: 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.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in
[Bug 1901758] Review Request: python-pyls-spyder - Spyder extensions for the python-language-server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901758 Tomáš Hrnčiar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||thrnc...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|thrnc...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901829] New: Review Request: php-yoast-phpunit-polyfills - Set of polyfills for changed PHPUnit functionality
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901829 Bug ID: 1901829 Summary: Review Request: php-yoast-phpunit-polyfills - Set of polyfills for changed PHPUnit functionality Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: fed...@famillecollet.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://git.remirepo.net/cgit/rpms/php/yoast/php-yoast-phpunit-polyfills.git/plain/php-yoast-phpunit-polyfills.spec?id=ce7a71c1c059d90399c31c5fe22d8f328e33070e SRPM URL: https://rpms.remirepo.net/SRPMS/php-yoast-phpunit-polyfills-0.2.0-1.remi.src.rpm Description: Set of polyfills for changed PHPUnit functionality to allow for creating PHPUnit cross-version compatible tests. Autoloader: /usr/share/php/Yoast/PHPUnitPolyfills/autoload.php Fedora Account System Username: remi --- New build dependency of php-phpmailer6 -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1885495] Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1885495 --- Comment #20 from Carl George 鸞 --- I was able to run the review tool against that copr build. It pointed out that we have a complicated license situation, similar to qatlib. All licenses must be reflected in the License field, using the combined scenario guidelines [0]. Based on the output of the review tool's license check and the upstream description [1], I think this should cover it: License: BSD and OpenSSL and GPLv2 and (BSD or GPLv2) Additionally, all license files must be included in %files and marked as %license [2]. [0] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_combined_dual_and_multiple_licensing_scenario [1] https://github.com/intel/QAT_Engine/blob/master/README.md#licensing [2] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1894605] Review Request: realtime-tests - Suite of realtime tests including cyclictest
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1894605 --- Comment #10 from John Kacur --- I also did the latest build in COPR https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/jkacur/realtime-tests/ -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1894605] Review Request: realtime-tests - Suite of realtime tests including cyclictest
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1894605
--- Comment #9 from John Kacur ---
Ah, now see what you meant by
Correct URL would be:
Source0:
https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/rt-tests/rt-tests-%{version}.tar.xz
Which causes the following error:
+ cd realtime-tests-1.9
/var/tmp/rpm-tmp.bwMsBx: line 38: cd: realtime-tests-1.9: No such file or
directory
Use:
%setup -q -n rt-tests-%{version}
I have now made that change.
srpm and specfile here
https://jkacur.fedorapeople.org/
koji build here
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=56265658
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901665] Review Request: box86 - Linux Userspace x86 Emulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665 --- Comment #2 from Raphael Groner --- *** Bug 1800429 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1800429] Review Request - box86
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1800429 Raphael Groner changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2020-11-26 02:59:22 --- Comment #8 from Raphael Groner --- New review started in another request, see bug #1901665. (In reply to Petr Pisar from comment #5) > I hid this review from a review listing. Once your package is ready, delete > the "NotReady" word from a whiteboard field. Anyways, thanks so far for your interest. See bug #1788327 for more details about continuation plans. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1901665 *** -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901759] Review Request: python-jupyterlab_pygments - Pygments theme
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901759 --- Comment #1 from Mukundan Ragavan --- Updated SPEC URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-jupyterlab_pygments/python-jupyterlab_pygments.spec Updated SRPM URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-jupyterlab_pygments/python-jupyterlab_pygments-0.1.2-1.fc33.src.rpm -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901757] Review Request: python-pyls_black - Black plugin for the Python Language Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901757 Mukundan Ragavan changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Mukundan Ragavan --- Updated SPEC URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls_black/python-pyls_black.spec Updated SRPM URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls_black/python-pyls_black-0.4.6-1.fc33.src.rpm -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901758] Review Request: python-pyls-spyder - Spyder extensions for the python-language-server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901758 --- Comment #1 from Mukundan Ragavan --- Updated SPEC URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls-spyder/python-pyls-spyder.spec Updated SRPM URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls-spyder/python-pyls-spyder-0.2.1-1.fc33.src.rpm -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901758] Review Request: python-pyls-spyder - Spyder extensions for the python-language-server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901758 Mukundan Ragavan changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: -|extensions for the ||python-language-server Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901759] Review Request: python-jupyterlab_pygments - Pygments theme
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901759 Mukundan Ragavan changed: What|Removed |Added Summary|Review Request: -|- Pygments theme Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901759] New: Review Request: -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901759 Bug ID: 1901759 Summary: Review Request: - Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nonamed...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-jupyterlab_pygments/python-jupyterlab_pygments.spec SRPM URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-jupyterlab_pygments/python-jupyterlab_pygments-0.1.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: This package contains a syntax coloring theme for pygments making use of the JupyterLab CSS variables Fedora Account System Username: nonamedotc -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901758] New: Review Request: -
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901758 Bug ID: 1901758 Summary: Review Request: - Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nonamed...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls-spyder/python-pyls-spyder.spec SRPM URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls-spyder/python-pyls-spyder-0.1.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Spyder extensions to the python language server (pyls) Fedora Account System Username: nonamedotc -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901757] New: Review Request: python-pyls_black - Black plugin for the Python Language Server
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901757 Bug ID: 1901757 Summary: Review Request: python-pyls_black - Black plugin for the Python Language Server Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: nonamed...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls_black/python-pyls_black.spec SRPM URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-pyls_black/python-pyls_black-0.1.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: Black plugin for the Python Language Server. pyls-black can either format an entire file or just the selected text. The code will only be formatted if it is syntactically valid Python. Text selections are treated as if they were a separate Python file. Fedora Account System Username: nonamedotc -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 476234] Review Request: mindi-busybox - Busybox version suited for Mindi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476234 Bruno Cornec changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Resolution|DEFERRED|--- Keywords||Reopened --- Comment #28 from Bruno Cornec --- New try with these newly built packages for fedora 33: SRPM: ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/fedora/33/x86_64/mindi-busybox-1.25.1-0.20201126002730.s3777M.fc33.src.rpm SPEC: ftp://ftp.mondorescue.org/test/fedora/33/x86_64/mindi-busybox.spec Let me know how I can improve that and hopefully unblock the full MondoRescue chain as I'm working on it again. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 187317] Review Request: mindi - Creation of emergency boot disks/CDs using your kernel, tools and modules
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=187317 Bug 187317 depends on bug 476234, which changed state. Bug 476234 Summary: Review Request: mindi-busybox - Busybox version suited for Mindi https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=476234 What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Resolution|DEFERRED|--- -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901747] New: Review Request: python-subprocess-tee - A subprocess.run that works like tee, being able to display output in real time while still capturing it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901747 Bug ID: 1901747 Summary: Review Request: python-subprocess-tee - A subprocess.run that works like tee, being able to display output in real time while still capturing it Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: chedi.toue...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://chedi.fedorapeople.org/python-subprocess-tee.spec SRPM URL: https://chedi.fedorapeople.org/python-subprocess-tee-0.1.5-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: A subprocess.run that works like tee, being able to display output in real time while still capturing it Fedora Account System Username: chedi -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901740] New: Review Request: lua-readline - Lua interface to the readline and history libraries
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901740 Bug ID: 1901740 Summary: Review Request: lua-readline - Lua interface to the readline and history libraries Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mic...@michel-slm.name QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/lua/lua-readline.spec SRPM URL: https://salimma.fedorapeople.org/specs/lua/lua-readline-2.7-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: This Lua module offers a simple calling interface to the GNU Readline/History Library. Fedora Account System Username: salimma -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1889021] Review Request: python-mrcrowbar - Library and framework for reverse engineering binary file formats
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1889021 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2020-249018f223 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-249018f223 -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901665] Review Request: box86 - Linux Userspace x86 Emulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665
--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender ---
First, big thanks for bringing this package to Fedora! :)
> %check
> # Tests are failing for now
> %ctest || :
Any indication why they are failing? Could you add an extra comment explaining
that?
> %files
> %license LICENSE
> %doc CHANGELOG.md README.md USAGE.md
> %config %{_sysconfdir}/binfmt.d/box86.conf
The config file should be marked as "noreplace", otherwise it will get
overwritten on package reinstalls and updates:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_configuration_files
> %ifnarch %{ix86}
> %{_prefix}/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libgcc_s.so.1
> %{_prefix}/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.5
> %{_prefix}/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6
> %endif
If the target is ARM 32-bit, is the if-clause needed and would it still work if
you used %{_libdir} (the preferred macro) instead?
Also, I think you can catch the libstdc++ SO files with a tailing '*' at the
end, instead of the digits.
"/usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu" seems like a Debian/Ubuntu libdir. Is there any way
to convert it to a Fedora-compatible path or put the packaged SO files into a
box86-specific dir in /usr/lib and let cmake link against these?
Extra items in the review below:
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Provides: bundled(gnulib) in place as required.
Note: Sources not installed
Review: Not sure about this. The full gnulib is NOT bundled, just 3 SO
files.
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
Note: Using prebuilt packages
[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: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
licenses manually.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu
Review: As mentioned before, this is not a standard Fedora dir.
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu,
/etc/binfmt.d
Review: Same here.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
Note: No (noreplace) in %config /etc/binfmt.d/box86.conf
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: 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 30720 bytes in 3 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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 %license.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
[Bug 1901665] Review Request: box86 - Linux Userspace x86 Emulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665 Andy Mender changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||andymenderu...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|andymenderu...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1895696] libsmf: a library to read / write MIDI files
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1895696 --- Comment #7 from Andy Mender --- Fair enough. Thanks for the update! -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1788327] Review Request: gl4es - OpenGL to GL ES translation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1788327 --- Comment #15 from Raphael Groner --- Thanks. Should I close bug #1800429 as a duplicate of bug #1901665 then? There's already some interest for review mentioned in the original request. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901665] Review Request: box86 - Linux Userspace x86 Emulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665 Raphael Groner changed: What|Removed |Added CC||projects...@smart.ms Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1898312] Review Request: jakarta-json - Jakarta JSON Processing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898312 Fabio Valentini changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|decatho...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Fabio Valentini --- I'll continue this review, but I cannot promise to get it done before tomorrow. Small note: Since this is a "rename-review", there's no need to include the %changelog of the old package, except if you want to explicitly keep it. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901583] Review Request: javapackages-bootstrap - A means of bootstrapping Java Packages Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901583
--- Comment #1 from Mikolaj Izdebski ---
The review is ongoing, licensing is complex so it will take me some
time to complete. Items marked with "+" are passed, ones marked with
"-" are failed and need to be fixed or explained.
+ 1. spec file looks sane
+ 2. license tag looks fine on first glance, but due to its complexity
will be evaluated later in more detail
+ 3. complex licensing is explained in licensing breakdown file
+ 4. package builds in rawhide x86_64
+ 5. rpmlint identified 1 error and 112 warnings, all false-positives
+ 6. requires look sane
+ 7. provides look sane
+ 8. file manifest looks good, JAR files are installed in a
subdirectory of /usr/share/java/
+ 9. package is installable on rawhide x86_64
+ 10. bundled provides were added
- 11. upstream was not yet contacted about unbundling dependencies
("All packages whose upstreams have no mechanism to build
against system libraries must be contacted publicly about a path
to supporting system libraries.", Bundled Software Policy)
- 12. automatic dependencies are not filtered ("Packages that bundle
libraries must follow the AutoProvides filtering guidelines for
private libraries.", Bundled Software Policy)
+ 13. buildrequires are correct
+ 14. there is no Class-path in JAR manifests
+ 15. the package is noarch
+ 16. dist tag is used correctly
--
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1788327] Review Request: gl4es - OpenGL to GL ES translation library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1788327 --- Comment #14 from Nicolas Chauvet (kwizart) --- (In reply to Raphael Groner from comment #3) > Thanks for the hints. I'll continue asap due to limited time. > > This request is mainly a preparation to give to the emulator box86 a chance > and to get into Fedora with packaging: > "Most x86 Games need OpenGL, so on ARM platforms, a solution like gl4es is > probably needed." > https://ameridroid.com/blogs/ameriblogs/how-to-run-x86-linux-applications-on- > arm-linux-with-box86 I don't see a direct needs for gl4s on dox86, I've submitted a review from https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665 Tested on arm with Toshiba AC100 using mesa libGL. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901665] New: Review Request: box86 - Linux Userspace x86 Emulator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901665 Bug ID: 1901665 Summary: Review Request: box86 - Linux Userspace x86 Emulator Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: kwiz...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: http://dl.kwizart.net/review/box86.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.kwizart.net/review/box86-0.1.4-1.fc31.src.rpm Description: Linux Userspace x86 Emulator Fedora Account System Username: kwizart Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=56251261 This package is known to only work on arm. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1898311] Review Request: ee4j-project - EE4J parent POM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898311 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Blocks||201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW) Resolution|--- |WONTFIX Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Last Closed||2020-11-25 18:36:10 --- Comment #1 from Jerry James --- This package turns out to not be necessary for Fedora. I am withdrawing the review request. Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1898311] Review Request: ee4j-project - EE4J parent POM
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898311 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|1898312 | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898312 [Bug 1898312] Review Request: jakarta-json - Jakarta JSON Processing -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1898312] Review Request: jakarta-json - Jakarta JSON Processing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898312 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On|1898311 | Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |jakarta-jsonp - Jakarta |jakarta-json - Jakarta JSON |JSON Processing |Processing --- Comment #2 from Jerry James --- Sorry for the delay. The last 10 days have been unusually busy. I have renamed the package to jakarta-json as suggested. I'm sticking with the 1.1.6 release and have dropped the parent as Mikolaj suggested. You're right about the profiles. I have slightly altered the spec file to deal with that. New URLs: Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/jakarta-json/jakarta-json.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/jakarta-json/jakarta-json-1.1.6-1.fc34.src.rpm Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898311 [Bug 1898311] Review Request: ee4j-project - EE4J parent POM -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1881381] Review Request: dtkgui - Deepin dtkgui
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881381 --- Comment #7 from Andy Mender --- Got it! Thanks for the swift reply! -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1350884] Review Request: mspgcc - Rebase of GCC for the MSP430 to TI / Red Hat upstream
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350884 --- Comment #58 from Brandon Nielsen --- Okay, I can verify the compiler works on armhfp. I'll just disable tests on that platform. Looking into s390x now, that will be harder since I don't seem to have any IBM big iron laying around... -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901583] Review Request: javapackages-bootstrap - A means of bootstrapping Java Packages Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901583 Mikolaj Izdebski changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mizde...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mizde...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901583] New: Review Request: javapackages-bootstrap - A means of bootstrapping Java Packages Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901583 Bug ID: 1901583 Summary: Review Request: javapackages-bootstrap - A means of bootstrapping Java Packages Tools Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: mkon...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://mkoncek.fedorapeople.org/javapackages-bootstrap.spec SRPM URL: https://mkoncek.fedorapeople.org/javapackages-bootstrap-1.0.0-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: In a nutshell, Java Packages Bootstrap (JPB) is a standalone build of all Java software packages that are required for Java Packages Tools (JPT) to work. In order to achieve reliable and reproducible builds of Java packages while meeting Fedora policy that requires everything to be built from source, without using prebuilt binary artifacts, it is necessary to build the packages in a well-defined, acyclic order. Dependency cycles between packages are the biggest obstacle to achieving this goal and JPT is the biggest offender -- it requires more than a hundred of Java packages, all of which in turn build-require JPT. JPB comes with a solution to this problem -- it builds everything that JPT needs to work, without reliance on any Java software other than OpenJDK. JPT can depend on JPB for everything, without depending on any other Java packages. For example, JPB contains embedded version of XMvn, removing dependency of JPT on XMvn, allowing JPT to be used before one builds XMvn package. Fedora Account System Username: mkoncek -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1897619] Review Request: rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram - Asciidoctor diagramming extension
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897619 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(chris.brown@redha ||t.com) --- Comment #1 from Jared Smith --- The %check section appears to have some issues: + umask 022 + cd /builddir/build/BUILD + cd asciidoctor-diagram-2.0.5 + rspec -r asciidoctor-pdf --pattern spec/blockdiag_spec.rb --pattern spec/test_helper.rb --pattern spec/ditaa_spec.rb --pattern spec/msc_spec.rb --pattern spec/plantuml_spec.rb --pattern spec/gnuplot_spec.rb --pattern spec/meme_spec.rb --pattern spec/graphviz_spec.rb An error occurred while loading asciidoctor-pdf. Failure/Error: return gem_original_require(path) LoadError: cannot load such file -- prawn/icon # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor/pdf/ext/prawn/extensions.rb:5:in `' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor/pdf/ext/prawn.rb:9:in `require_relative' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor/pdf/ext/prawn.rb:9:in `' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor/pdf/ext.rb:6:in `require_relative' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor/pdf/ext.rb:6:in `' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor/pdf.rb:13:in `require_relative' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor/pdf.rb:13:in `' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor-pdf.rb:3:in `require_relative' # /usr/share/gems/gems/asciidoctor-pdf-1.5.3/lib/asciidoctor-pdf.rb:3:in `' # -- # --- Caused by: --- # LoadError: # cannot load such file -- asciidoctor-pdf # /usr/share/rubygems/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:83:in `require' No examples found. Finished in 0.3 seconds (files took 0.15893 seconds to load) 0 examples, 0 failures, 1 error occurred outside of examples error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.uBBi4w (%check) -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1897619] Review Request: rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram - Asciidoctor diagramming extension
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897619 Jared Smith changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|jsmith.fed...@gmail.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901377] Review Request: python-three_merge - Simple library for merging two strings with respect to a base one
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901377 --- Comment #3 from Mukundan Ragavan --- Thanks for the review. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1619610] mozilla-filesystem to own %_libdir/mozilla/native-messaging-hosts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1619610 Pavel Raiskup changed: What|Removed |Added Status|CLOSED |NEW Version|31 |32 Resolution|EOL |--- Keywords||Reopened -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1898135] Review Request: python-pyerfa - Python wrapper for the ERFA library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1898135 --- Comment #3 from Christian Dersch --- Thank you for taking a look at my package! I'll rework the SPEC today. I started with a template spec using "rpmdev-newspec -t python python-pyerfa", however the template provided by rpmdev-newspec seems to differ from our guidelines in some points… -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
[Bug 1901377] Review Request: python-three_merge - Simple library for merging two strings with respect to a base one
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901377
Tomáš Hrnčiar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|POST
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Tomáš Hrnčiar ---
Package is APPROVED.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[-]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package 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]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 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: No rpmlint messages.
[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 %license.
[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]: 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]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not use a name that already exists.
[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
Python:
[x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
process.
[x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should
provide egg info.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[x]: 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.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
publishes signatures.
Note: gpgverify is not used.
[-]: 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.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps
[Bug 1901377] Review Request: python-three_merge - Simple library for merging two strings with respect to a base one
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901377 Tomáš Hrnčiar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||thrnc...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|thrnc...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
