[Bug 1907976] Review Request: megapixels - A GTK3 camera application that knows how to deal with the media request api
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907976
--- Comment #4 from Torrey Sorensen ---
Spec URL:
https://gitlab.com/fedora-mobile/megapixels/-/raw/master/megapixels.spec
SRPM URL:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/njha/mobile/fedora-rawhide-aarch64/01841904-megapixels/megapixels-0.13.1-2.fc34.src.rpm
Copr Build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/njha/mobile/build/1841904/
> 1. Why %global debug_package %{nil} ? Don't we want debuginfo?
Yes, we want debuginfo. Removed that line.
> 2. The package seems to include the inih package bundled in.
> Might see if you can get it to use inih-devel already packaged in Fedora?
> If not, you may have to Provides: bundled(inih)
I added inih-devel to BuildRequires.
> 3. Need to own /usr/share/megapixels and /usr/share/megapixels/config
> (either via %dir in files, or changing the globbing)
Fixed :)
> 4. DEBUG util.py:444: warning: bogus date in %changelog:
> Wed Dec 03 2020 Torrey Sorensen - 0.12.0-2
> The 3rd was a thursday. ;)
oof, that was dumb of me.
> 5. It doesn't seem to work here on x86_64:
As mentioned I added ExclusiveArch for the two arm arches.
Tested and still works "as expected" on the PinePhone.
Thank you 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 1905270] Review Request: bpfmon - Traffic monitor for BPF expression/iptables rule
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1905270 Boian Bonev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-12-18 01:05:30 -- 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 1905270] Review Request: bpfmon - Traffic monitor for BPF expression/iptables rule
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1905270 Bug 1905270 depends on bug 1905260, which changed state. Bug 1905260 Summary: Review Request: yascreen - Yet Another Screen Library (lib(n)curses alternative) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1905260 What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE -- 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 1905260] Review Request: yascreen - Yet Another Screen Library (lib(n)curses alternative)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1905260 Boian Bonev changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-12-18 01:04:41 -- 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 1908922] Review Request: libopenaptx - Open Source implementation of Audio Processing Technology codec (aptX)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908922 Aleksei Bavshin changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alebast...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #1 from Aleksei Bavshin --- IANAL as well, but I'm not sure about the legal status of aptX HD. Blocking FE-Legal (bug182235) would be a good idea. As for the spec file -- have you considered making commandline tools a separate package? Although the only benefit I'm aware of that multilib packages could be installed in parallel (e.g. i686 + x86_64). Looks good otherwise. -- 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 1908929] New: Review Request: Randy - Conky like app in Rust
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908929 Bug ID: 1908929 Summary: Review Request: Randy - Conky like app in Rust Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: iha...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://ian.ahands.org/packages/randy.spec SRPM URL: https://ian.ahands.org/packages/randy-1.6.9-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: System monitor application written in Rust/GTK3 Fedora Account System Username: iphands -- 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 1907976] Review Request: megapixels - A GTK3 camera application that knows how to deal with the media request api
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907976
--- Comment #3 from Peter Robinson ---
> 1. Why %global debug_package %{nil} ? Don't we want debuginfo?
We do :)
> 2. The package seems to include the inih package bundled in.
> Might see if you can get it to use inih-devel already packaged in Fedora?
> If not, you may have to Provides: bundled(inih)
It might be a fork due to something not upstream, or requiring a non stable/LTS
release, if that's the case it should be documented why with comments and if
the former to a ticket for resolution.
> 5. It doesn't seem to work here on x86_64:
>
> Could not read device name from device tree
> Could not find any config file
>
> Is it arm specific? If so, perhaps a ExclusiveArch ?
Looking at the upstream it states "As first step it will get the first
compatible name in the device tree" and reading further on it's VERY dependent
on specific sensors and SoCs so yes, it should be ExclusiveArch to the two arm
arches, it would work with some ARMv7 devices too but I doubt it would work
with the Raspberry Pi.
Ultimately in the short term I think this is fine, in the medium term an app
based on libcamera is what we'll actually need TBH.
--
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 1907976] Review Request: megapixels - A GTK3 camera application that knows how to deal with the media request api
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907976
--- Comment #2 from Kevin Fenzi ---
Issues:
1. Why %global debug_package %{nil} ? Don't we want debuginfo?
2. The package seems to include the inih package bundled in.
Might see if you can get it to use inih-devel already packaged in Fedora?
If not, you may have to Provides: bundled(inih)
3. Need to own /usr/share/megapixels and /usr/share/megapixels/config
(either via %dir in files, or changing the globbing)
4. DEBUG util.py:444: warning: bogus date in %changelog:
Wed Dec 03 2020 Torrey Sorensen - 0.12.0-2
The 3rd was a thursday. ;)
5. It doesn't seem to work here on x86_64:
Could not read device name from device tree
Could not find any config file
Is it arm specific? If so, perhaps a ExclusiveArch ?
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]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[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: "Unknown or generated". 47 files have unknown license. Detailed
output of licensecheck in /home/kevin/megapixels/review-
megapixels/licensecheck.txt
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/share/megapixels,
/usr/share/megapixels/config
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/megapixels/config,
/usr/share/megapixels
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[!]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[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.
[x]: 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.
[!]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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.
Note: Documentation size is 30720 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: 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
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]: 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
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
file from upstream, the pac
[Bug 1908922] New: Review Request: libopenaptx - Open Source implementation of Audio Processing Technology codec (aptX)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908922 Bug ID: 1908922 Summary: Review Request: libopenaptx - Open Source implementation of Audio Processing Technology codec (aptX) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: gomb...@disroot.org QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://gombosg.fedorapeople.org/libopenaptx/libopenaptx.spec SRPM URL: https://gombosg.fedorapeople.org/libopenaptx/libopenaptx-0.2.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: This is Open Source implementation of Audio Processing Technology codec (aptX) derived from ffmpeg 4.0 project and licensed under LGPLv2.1+. This codec is mainly used in Bluetooth A2DP profile. Fedora Account System Username: gombosg Scratch build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=57676629 --- This is going to be very useful for pipewire, along with libldac. Upstream implementation is going on in here: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/pulseaudio/pulseaudio/-/merge_requests/227 Then, pipewire can be built with this in Fedora: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/pipewire/pipewire/-/blob/master/spa/meson.build#L31-32 Note that aptX was patent protected, but (IANAL) it has expired. The library README says "derived from ffmpeg 4.0 project". But this only contains aptX related code and doesn't depend on ffmpeg. Maybe it will need legal 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 1907976] Review Request: megapixels - A GTK3 camera application that knows how to deal with the media request api
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1907976 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ke...@scrye.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Kevin Fenzi --- I'll review this. Look for a full review in a bit. -- 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 1870890] Review Request: chatty - mobile libpurple messaging client
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1870890 Kevin Fenzi changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ke...@scrye.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ke...@scrye.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #7 from Kevin Fenzi --- I'm happy to review this. Could you update the urls to src.rpm and spec? The ones in comment 3 seem to be 404ing now. ;( I did pull the 0.2.0-1 one from copr, but it doesn't seem to build here in mock. ;( In file included from /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gthread.h:32, from /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gasyncqueue.h:32, from /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib.h:32, from /usr/include/gtk-3.0/gdk/gdkconfig.h:13, from /usr/include/gtk-3.0/gdk/gdk.h:30, from /usr/include/gtk-3.0/gtk/gtk.h:30, from ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c:1: ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c: In function ‘gtk_sorter_order_get_type’: /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gatomic.h:112:5: error: argument 2 of ‘__atomic_load’ discards ‘volatile’ qualifier [-Wer ror=incompatible-pointer-types] 112 | __atomic_load (gapg_temp_atomic, &gapg_temp_newval, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); \ | ^ /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gthread.h:260:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_atomic_pointer_get’ 260 | (!g_atomic_pointer_get (location) && \ | ^~~~ ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c:12:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_once_init_enter’ 12 | if (g_once_init_enter (&g_define_type_id__volatile)) | ^ ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c: In function ‘gtk_sorter_change_get_type’: /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gatomic.h:112:5: error: argument 2 of ‘__atomic_load’ discards ‘volatile’ qualifier [-Wer ror=incompatible-pointer-types] 112 | __atomic_load (gapg_temp_atomic, &gapg_temp_newval, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); \ | ^ /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gthread.h:260:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_atomic_pointer_get’ 260 | (!g_atomic_pointer_get (location) && \ | ^~~~ ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c:32:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_once_init_enter’ 32 | if (g_once_init_enter (&g_define_type_id__volatile)) | ^ ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c: In function ‘gtk_filter_match_get_type’: /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gatomic.h:112:5: error: argument 2 of ‘__atomic_load’ discards ‘volatile’ qualifier [-Wer ror=incompatible-pointer-types] 112 | __atomic_load (gapg_temp_atomic, &gapg_temp_newval, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); \ | ^ /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gthread.h:260:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_atomic_pointer_get’ 260 | (!g_atomic_pointer_get (location) && \ | ^~~~ ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c:55:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_once_init_enter’ 55 | if (g_once_init_enter (&g_define_type_id__volatile)) | ^ ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c: In function ‘gtk_filter_change_get_type’: /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gatomic.h:112:5: error: argument 2 of ‘__atomic_load’ discards ‘volatile’ qualifier [-Werror=incompatible-pointer-types] 112 | __atomic_load (gapg_temp_atomic, &gapg_temp_newval, __ATOMIC_SEQ_CST); \ | ^ /usr/include/glib-2.0/glib/gthread.h:260:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_atomic_pointer_get’ 260 | (!g_atomic_pointer_get (location) && \ | ^~~~ ../src/contrib/gtktypebuiltins.c:75:7: note: in expansion of macro ‘g_once_init_enter’ 75 | if (g_once_init_enter (&g_define_type_id__volatile)) | ^ cc1: some warnings being treated as errors Might be it worked under gcc 10, but rawhide is now using gcc 11? -- 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 1908909] New: Review Request: keyring-ima-signer - An IMA file signing tool using the kernel keyring
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908909 Bug ID: 1908909 Summary: Review Request: keyring-ima-signer - An IMA file signing tool using the kernel keyring Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: pbrobin...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora SPEC: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/keyring-ima-signer.spec SRPM: https://pbrobinson.fedorapeople.org/keyring-ima-signer-0.1.0-1.fc33.src.rpm Description: The IMA (Integrity Measurement Architecture) is a key component of the Linux integrity subsystem designed to ensure integrity, authenticity, and confidentiality of systems including hardware root of trusts (TPM). This tool allows signing of files in userspace, inclusding options of including the signature in xattr or a .sig file, using signing keys stored in the kernel keyring to ensure they're not recoverable. FAS: pbrobinson koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=57672626 -- 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 1908526] Review Request: python-opentracing - OpenTracing interface for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908526 --- Comment #1 from n...@mykolab.com --- Hello, This is my first package: I need a sponsor. Could you please help me? It passes on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=57670863 Thanks in advance. Best regards Fabrice -- 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 1908041] Review Request: juniversalchardet - Java character encoding detection
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908041 --- Comment #2 from Jerry James --- Thank you 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 1908713] Review Request: mingw-openexr - MinGW Windows openexr library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908713 Sandro Mani changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2020-12-17 16:27:04 -- 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 1908713] Review Request: mingw-openexr - MinGW Windows openexr library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908713 --- Comment #4 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/mingw-openexr -- 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 1908767] Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908767 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/qatengine -- 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 1908713] Review Request: mingw-openexr - MinGW Windows openexr library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908713 Sandro Mani changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST --- Comment #3 from Sandro Mani --- Thanks! -- 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 1908713] Review Request: mingw-openexr - MinGW Windows openexr library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908713
Jerry James changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Jerry James ---
Looks good. This package is APPROVED.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
= 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]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/i686-w64-mingw32/sys-
root/mingw/include/OpenEXR(mingw32-ilmbase),
/usr/x86_64-w64-mingw32/sys-
root/mingw/include/OpenEXR(mingw64-ilmbase)
This package is replacing those, so this is okay.
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: 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]: 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 %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
(~1MB) or number of files.
Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct.
[-]: 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 of original installed
files.
[x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[x]: Buildroot is not present
[x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
[x]: No file re
[Bug 1908767] Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908767 --- Comment #2 from Carl George 🤠 --- *** Bug 1885495 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 1885495] Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1885495 Carl George 🤠 changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Last Closed||2020-12-17 15:57:13 --- Comment #35 from Carl George 🤠 --- Done. Closing this one out so work can continue over there. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1908767 *** -- 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 1908767] Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908767 Carl George 🤠 changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Carl George 🤠 --- Thanks for making a new bug so we can clear this up Yogaraj. This goes back to my concern about multiple submitters working on the review. As you noted the review already passed in bug 1885495, so I'm marking this bug as approved as well. -- 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 1908041] Review Request: juniversalchardet - Java character encoding detection
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908041 Sandro Mani changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #1 from Sandro Mani --- License is correct. Requires and provides look good. Rpmlint only reports a spelling warning which is a false positive. Criteria listed in [1] are satisfied. File and directory package ownership is correct. Nothing jumps to the eye in the build log. Approved! [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Java/ -- 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 #34 from Yogaraj Alamenda --- Thanks for the approval. Repo request[1] created by me was closed as invalid due to the reason "The Bugzilla review bug creator didn't match the requester in Pagure." I have created new Review BZ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908767 in my name. Could you please approve the BZ #1908767 to proceed with repo creation ? [1] https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/31368 -- 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 1908767] Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908767 Yogaraj Alamenda changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|c...@redhat.com -- 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 1908041] Review Request: juniversalchardet - Java character encoding detection
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908041 Sandro Mani changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||manisan...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|manisan...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value 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 1908713] Review Request: mingw-openexr - MinGW Windows openexr library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908713 Jerry James changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||loganje...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|loganje...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Jerry James --- I will take this review. If you don't mind Java reviews, could you take bug 1908041? -- 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 1908767] Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908767 Yogaraj Alamenda changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|unspecified |high CC||c...@redhat.com, ||vdro...@redhat.com 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 1908767] New: Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908767 Bug ID: 1908767 Summary: Review Request: qatengine - Intel(R) QuickAssist Technology (QAT) OpenSSL Engine Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: yogarajx.alame...@intel.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora qatengine package inclusion review is originally reviewed and approved in 1885495. But Dinesh(Original Bug Creator) is not the Fedora maintainer. I will be maintaining the qatengine package. Hence raising new bug as the repo creation requests fails with error "The Bugzilla review bug creator didn't match the requester in Pagure". The spec file and srpm from the previous ticket: Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dineshbx/qatengine/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01811337-qatengine/qatengine.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/dineshbx/qatengine/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01811337-qatengine/qatengine-0.6.3-1.fc34.src.rpm Build on copr: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/dineshbx/qatengine/build/1811337/ Build on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=56764736 Fedora Account System Username: yogaraj -- 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 1908740] New: Review Request: harry -- a tool for measuring string similarity
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908740 Bug ID: 1908740 Summary: Review Request: harry -- a tool for measuring string similarity Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: rland...@redhat.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rlandmann/Harry/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01840938-harry/harry.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/rlandmann/Harry/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01840938-harry/harry-0.4.2-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Harry is a small tool for comparing strings. The tool supports several common distance and kernel functions for strings as well as some exotic similarity measures. The focus of Harry lies on implicit similarity measures, that is, comparison functions that do not give rise to an explicit vector space. Examples of such similarity measures are the Levenshtein distance, the Jaro-Winkler distance or the spectrum kernel. -- 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 1908713] New: Review Request: mingw-openexr - MinGW Windows openexr library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1908713 Bug ID: 1908713 Summary: Review Request: mingw-openexr - MinGW Windows openexr library Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: manisan...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/mingw-openexr.spec SRPM URL: https://smani.fedorapeople.org/review/mingw-openexr-2.5.3-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: MinGW Windows openexr library Fedora Account System Username: smani -- 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
