[Bug 1950594] Re-Review Request: iaito - GUI for radare2 reverse engineering framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950594 Michal Ambroz changed: What|Removed |Added CC||hen...@henriknordstrom.net Fixed In Version|hen...@henriknordstrom.net | -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950594] Re-Review Request: iaito - GUI for radare2 reverse engineering framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950594 Michal Ambroz changed: What|Removed |Added Fixed In Version||hen...@henriknordstrom.net 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950594] New: Re-Review Request: iaito - GUI for radare2 reverse engineering framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950594 Bug ID: 1950594 Summary: Re-Review Request: iaito - GUI for radare2 reverse engineering framework Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: re...@seznam.cz QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora SPEC: https://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SPECS/iaito.spec SRPM: https://rebus.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/iaito-5.2.0-2.fc33.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: rebus Description: iaito is a Qt and C++ GUI for radare2. It is the continuation of Cutter before the fork to keep radare2 as backend. Its goal is making an advanced, customizable and FOSS reverse-engineering platform while keeping the user experience at mind. The iaito is created by reverse engineers for reverse engineers. Focus on supporting latest version of radare2. Recommend the use of system installed libraries/radare2. Closer integration between r2 and the UI. Please note this is Re-review of existing package r2cutter being now renamed to iaito. Upstream changed name to clear the ambiguity in naming and versions of the Cutter (fork of same GUI using different backend). I would like to create the package iaito and obsolete he r2cutter package. Koji Scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=66101319 $ rpmlint iaito-5.2.0-2.fc33.src.rpm iaito-5.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64.rpm iaito-devel-5.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64.rpm iaito-doc-5.2.0-2.fc33.x86_64.rpm iaito.spec iaito.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided r2cutter iaito-devel.x86_64: W: obsolete-not-provided r2cutter-devel iaito-devel.x86_64: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib iaito-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Versioned Obsoletes: and Versioned+Arch specific Provides: is in the package for both binary and devel package. Unfortunately rpmlint can't pair it and RPM doesn't support arch to be specified for Obsoletes: -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1690050] Review Request: cutter-re - GUI for radare2 reverse engineering framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1690050 Michal Ambroz changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED CC||re...@seznam.cz Resolution|--- |CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2021-04-17 03:13:34 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950554] Review Request: ocaml-camlbz2 - OCaml bindings for bzip2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950554 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mic...@michel-slm.name -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950554] Review Request: ocaml-camlbz2 - OCaml bindings for bzip2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950554 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mic...@michel-slm.name 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950555] Review Request: ocaml-parmap - OCaml library for exploiting multicore architectures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950555 Michel Alexandre Salim changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mic...@michel-slm.name Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mic...@michel-slm.name 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1918035] Review Request: xlsclients - X client list utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918035 Peter Hutterer changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED CC||peter.hutte...@redhat.com Fixed In Version||xlsclients-1.1.4-2.fc35 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed|2021-03-10 20:21:15 |2021-04-17 00:49:24 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950559] Review Request: mock-centos-sig-configs - Mock configs for CentOS SIGs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950559 --- Comment #3 from Davide Cavalca --- Thanks! $ fedpkg request-repo mock-centos-sig-configs 1950559 https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/33578 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950559] Review Request: mock-centos-sig-configs - Mock configs for CentOS SIGs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950559 Neal Gompa changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ngomp...@gmail.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ngomp...@gmail.com Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags||fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from Neal Gompa --- Package review notes: * Packaging follows Fedora Packaging Guidelines * Package licensing is correctly marked, with the license file correctly installed * Package builds and installs * No serious issues from rpmlint PACKAGE APPROVED. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950559] Review Request: mock-centos-sig-configs - Mock configs for CentOS SIGs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950559 --- Comment #1 from Davide Cavalca --- This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=66090800 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950559] New: Review Request: mock-centos-sig-configs - Mock configs for CentOS SIGs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950559 Bug ID: 1950559 Summary: Review Request: mock-centos-sig-configs - Mock configs for CentOS SIGs Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/mock-centos-sig-configs/mock-centos-sig-configs.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/mock-centos-sig-configs/mock-centos-sig-configs-0.1-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: This package contains mock configs for various CentOS SIGs. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950555] New: Review Request: ocaml-parmap - OCaml library for exploiting multicore architectures
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950555 Bug ID: 1950555 Summary: Review Request: ocaml-parmap - OCaml library for exploiting multicore architectures Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-parmap/ocaml-parmap.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-parmap/ocaml-parmap-1.2-1.fc35.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: Parmap is a minimalistic library for exploiting multicore architectures in OCaml programs with minimal modifications: if you want to use your many cores to accelerate an operation which happens to be a map, fold or map/fold (map-reduce), just use Parmap's parmap, parfold and parmapfold primitives in place of the standard List.map and friends, and specify the number of subprocesses to use with the optional parameter ~ncores. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950554] New: Review Request: ocaml-camlbz2 - OCaml bindings for bzip2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950554 Bug ID: 1950554 Summary: Review Request: ocaml-camlbz2 - OCaml bindings for bzip2 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: loganje...@gmail.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-camlbz2/ocaml-camlbz2.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/ocaml-camlbz2/ocaml-camlbz2-0.7.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: This package contains OCaml bindings for bzip2. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1925323] Review Request: google-compute-engine - Top-level package for enabling Google Compute Engine features
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1925323 ericedens changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||needinfo?(ngomp...@gmail.co ||m) -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1925323] Review Request: google-compute-engine - Top-level package for enabling Google Compute Engine features
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1925323 --- Comment #15 from ericedens --- Fixed lint error about using hardcoded path to `/usr` Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ericedens/gcp-guest-packages/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02137872-google-compute-engine/google-compute-engine.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ericedens/gcp-guest-packages/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02137872-google-compute-engine/google-compute-engine-20201207.00-5.fc35.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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950549] Review Request: oksh - Port of OpenBSD's version of the public domain Korn Shell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950549 Jani Juhani Sinervo changed: What|Removed |Added Comment|0 |updated --- Comment #0 has been edited --- Spec URL: https://sham1.xyz/files/rpm-review/oksh.spec SRPM URL: https://sham1.xyz/files/rpm-review/oksh-6.8.1-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Portable OpenBSD ksh, based on the Public Domain Korn Shell Fedora Account System Username: sham1 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950548] Review Request: tcl-ezsmtp - Easy SMTP for TCL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950548 Davide Cavalca changed: What|Removed |Added Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value --- Comment #2 from Davide Cavalca --- Note that rpmlint will warn about: tcl-ezsmtp.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/tcl-ezsmtp/examples/koi8-r-body.txt This is expected, as that file is referenced by a test and it needs to have that specific encoding. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950549] New: Review Request: oksh - Port of OpenBSD's version of the public domain Korn Shell
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950549 Bug ID: 1950549 Summary: Review Request: oksh - Port of OpenBSD's version of the public domain Korn Shell Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: j...@sinervo.fi QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: SRPM URL: Description: Fedora Account System Username: -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1950548] New: Review Request: tcl-ezsmtp - Easy SMTP for TCL
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1950548 Bug ID: 1950548 Summary: Review Request: tcl-ezsmtp - Easy SMTP for TCL Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Status: NEW Component: Package Review Assignee: nob...@fedoraproject.org Reporter: dcava...@fb.com QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora Spec URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/tcl-ezsmtp/tcl-ezsmtp.spec SRPM URL: https://dcavalca.fedorapeople.org/review/tcl-ezsmtp/tcl-ezsmtp-1.0.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Easy SMTP (ezsmtp) is a simple 100-Tcl cross-platform package for sending text email, based on original work by Keith Vetter at UC Berkeley. Fedora Account System Username: dcavalca -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1925323] Review Request: google-compute-engine - Top-level package for enabling Google Compute Engine features
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1925323 --- Comment #14 from ericedens --- Regarding the package name, I'd prefer to keep `google-compute-engine`, since this is what we use in CentOS and RHEL. https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/images/install-guest-environment#centosrhel Spec updates in this version: 1. Added `You need "Requires: dhcp-client`; verified that `/etc/dhcp/dhclient.d/google_hostname.sh` is called via `/usr/lib/NetworkManager/dispatcher.d/11-dhclient`. 2. Updated version number in change log to avoid "incoherent-version-in-changelog" Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ericedens/gcp-guest-packages/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02137866-google-compute-engine/google-compute-engine.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ericedens/gcp-guest-packages/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/02137866-google-compute-engine/google-compute-engine-20201207.00-4.fc35.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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948661] Review Request: perl-YAML-PP-LibYAML - Faster parsing for YAML::PP
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948661 Bug 1948661 depends on bug 1948651, which changed state. Bug 1948651 Summary: Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948651] Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651 Jitka Plesnikova changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012 ||-1.fc35 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-04-16 20:42:08 --- Comment #6 from Jitka Plesnikova --- Thank you for review and repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component ___ package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1949892] Review Request: python-plotly - An open-source, interactive data visualization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949892 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-5976c33ca4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-5976c33ca4 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-14ec9fcdb8 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-14ec9fcdb8 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1949892] Review Request: python-plotly - An open-source, interactive data visualization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949892 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-5976c33ca4 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-5976c33ca4 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1949892] Review Request: python-plotly - An open-source, interactive data visualization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949892 --- Comment #3 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-plotly -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1949892] Review Request: python-plotly - An open-source, interactive data visualization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949892 --- Comment #2 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Thanks again! I've made the suggested tweaks. Updated spec/srpm: Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-plotly/python-plotly.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-plotly/python-plotly-4.14.3-1.fc34.src.rpm Requesting SCM now. Cheers, Ankur -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1949892] Review Request: python-plotly - An open-source, interactive data visualization library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949892
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
- /usr → %{_prefix}
- I don't see any doc in the archive and you're not actually using Sphinx, so
I think this can be removed:
# For documentation
BuildRequires: %{py3_dist sphinx}
Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issues before import.
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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright*
[generated file]". 10417 files have unknown license. Detailed output
of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python-plotly/review-
python-plotly/licensecheck.txt
[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: 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 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]: %config files are marked noreplace or the reason is justified.
[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 use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: No %config files under /usr.
[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:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
f
[Bug 1949867] Review Request: ghc-koji - Koji buildsystem XML-RPC API bindings
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949867
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
Package approved.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
= MUST items =
C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.
Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see
attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic:
[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "GNU General Public License, Version
2". 5 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/ghc-koji/review-ghc-koji/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[-]: 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 10240 bytes in 2 files.
[x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Package installs properly.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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 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 packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: 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
tr
[Bug 1949793] Review Request: php-composer-xdebug-handler2 - Restarts a process without Xdebug, version 2
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949793
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
Package 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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License", "*No copyright* Expat
License". 33 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/php-composer-xdebug-
handler2/review-php-composer-xdebug-handler2/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/share/php/Composer(php-
composer-ca-bundle, php-composer-spdx-licenses, composer, php-
composer-semver3, php-composer-xdebug-handler)
[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 30720 bytes in 4 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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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 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 packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[?]: 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.
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
fil
[Bug 1949731] Review Request: python-doxytag2zealdb - Create a SQLite3 database from a Doxygen tag file
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949731
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |POST
CC||zebo...@gmail.com
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|zebo...@gmail.com
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 ---
Package 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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* GNU General Public
License v3.0 or later", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or later". 2
files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
/home/bob/packaging/review/python-doxytag2zealdb/review-python-
doxytag2zealdb/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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 20480 bytes in 4 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 requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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 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:
[-]: 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 attachm
[Bug 1795461] Review Request: practrand - Software package for the Randon number generation & testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795461 --- Comment #25 from Jiri Hladky --- Got it. Thank you, Ankur! -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933395] Review Request: rust-confy - Boilerplate-free configuration management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933395 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-80212c9b4a has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-80212c9b4a \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-80212c9b4a See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1922797] Review Request: golang-github-goki-freetype - The Freetype font rasterizer in the Go programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1922797 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-a3cd7819cc has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-a3cd7819cc \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a3cd7819cc See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1928436] Review Request: cm_rgb - Utility to control RGB on AMD Wraith Prism
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1928436 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-e339e0 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-e339e0 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-e339e0 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1933395] Review Request: rust-confy - Boilerplate-free configuration management
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1933395 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-80212c9b4a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-80212c9b4a -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1922797] Review Request: golang-github-goki-freetype - The Freetype font rasterizer in the Go programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1922797 --- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-a3cd7819cc has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a3cd7819cc -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1922797] Review Request: golang-github-goki-freetype - The Freetype font rasterizer in the Go programming language
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1922797 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-a2ddb68436 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-a2ddb68436 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1947059] Review Request: python-interrogate - Interrogate a codebase for docstring coverage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1947059 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-861fcdf259 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1946660] Review Request: python-drgn - Scriptable debugger library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1946660 --- Comment #24 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-1df61eda3b has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1946060] Review Request: golang-github-cyberdotgent-route3270 - A simple 3270 application/connection router
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1946060 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-cf08a83d02 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1945909] Review Request: libkdumpfile - Kernel coredump file access
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1945909 --- Comment #26 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-1df61eda3b has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1944471] Review Request: golang-github-racingmars-go3270 - 3270 server library for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1944471 --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-cf08a83d02 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948302] Review Request: python-pyspike - Library for the numerical analysis of spike train similarity
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948302 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-d9f638e0d2 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-d9f638e0d2 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-d9f638e0d2 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1940937] Review Request: rpi-imager - Graphical user-interface to write disk images and format SD cards
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1940937 --- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-5926f0a056 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1947059] Review Request: python-interrogate - Interrogate a codebase for docstring coverage
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1947059 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-04-16 14:34:01 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-46d104aa13 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1946151] Review Request: golang-github-pkg-diff - Create, modify, and print diffs
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1946151 --- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-b5309245c8 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1946660] Review Request: python-drgn - Scriptable debugger library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1946660 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-04-16 14:33:29 --- Comment #23 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-505a82b5ae has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1945909] Review Request: libkdumpfile - Kernel coredump file access
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1945909 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-04-16 14:33:27 --- Comment #25 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-505a82b5ae has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1946060] Review Request: golang-github-cyberdotgent-route3270 - A simple 3270 application/connection router
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1946060 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2021-04-16 14:33:25 --- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-1642119946 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1944471] Review Request: golang-github-racingmars-go3270 - 3270 server library for Go
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1944471 --- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-1642119946 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #10 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 --- Ok, thanks for taking a look! -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948651] Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1918035] Review Request: xlsclients - X client list utility
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1918035 --- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/xlsclients -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1928436] Review Request: cm_rgb - Utility to control RGB on AMD Wraith Prism
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1928436 Fedora Update System changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|MODIFIED --- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System --- FEDORA-2021-e339e0 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-e339e0 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1906980] Review Request: highway - Efficient and performance-portable SIMD
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1906980 --- Comment #9 from Ben Beasley --- So, if I may paraphrase, your argument is that a package can require extensions to the architectural baseline in order to build, as long as the Koji builders have these extensions in practice. (It’s established that library packages—but not applications—can require such extensions at runtime, https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/1044.) That might be a reasonable claim, actually. I’d rather see a package that builds everywhere, but I’m willing to go with it. I commented out the %ctest, but the hwy_test executable gets started anyway partway through the build and explodes as in my previous comment, so I’m going to have to skip reviewing this one. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948651] Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651 --- Comment #4 from Jitka Plesnikova --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/33571 -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948651] Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651
Petr Pisar changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Petr Pisar ---
Spec file changes:
--- perl-YAML-LibYAML-API.spec.old 2021-04-12 19:03:08.0 +0200
+++ perl-YAML-LibYAML-API.spec 2021-04-16 12:03:02.0 +0200
@@ -8,7 +8,6 @@
BuildRequires: coreutils
BuildRequires: findutils
BuildRequires: gcc
-BuildRequires: libyaml >= 0.2.5
BuildRequires: libyaml-devel >= 0.2.5
BuildRequires: make
BuildRequires: perl-devel
@@ -22,8 +21,7 @@
BuildRequires: perl(warnings)
# Run-time
BuildRequires: perl(XSLoader)
-BuildRequires: perl(YAML::PP) >= 0.024
-BuildRequires: perl(YAML::PP::Common)
+BuildRequires: perl(YAML::PP::Common) >= 0.024
# Tests
BuildRequires: perl(blib)
BuildRequires: perl(Encode)
@@ -31,9 +29,12 @@
BuildRequires: perl(FindBin)
BuildRequires: perl(IO::Handle)
BuildRequires: perl(IPC::Open3)
-BuildRequires: perl(Test::More)
+BuildRequires: perl(Test::More) >= 0.98
Requires: perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_%(eval "`perl -V:version`"; echo
$version))
-Requires: libyaml >= 0.2.5
+Requires: perl(YAML::PP::Common) >= 0.024
+
+# Filter unversioned require
+%global __requires_exclude
%{?__requires_exclude:%__requires_exclude|}perl\\(YAML::PP::Common\\)
%description
This module provides a thin wrapper around the C libyaml API.
@@ -59,6 +60,7 @@
%{_fixperms} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/*
%check
+unset AUTHOR_TESTING
export HARNESS_OPTIONS=j$(perl -e 'if ($ARGV[0] =~ /.*-j([0-9][0-9]*).*/)
{print $1} else {print 1}' -- '%{?_smp_mflags}')
make test
> TODO: Remove a trailing slash for the URL value.
Not addressed.
> TODO: Document in the spec file a license of the bundled ./LibYAML files.
> It's a MIT license.
Not addreseed.
> FIX: Do not build-require 'libyaml'. The packages only uses libyaml-devel.
Ok.
> FIX: Do not build-require 'perl(YAML::PP)'. It's used nowhere.
Ok.
> TODO: Constrain 'perl(YAML::PP::Common)' build-dependency with '>= 0.024'
> (Makefile.PL:32). Upstream probably mistaken the two modules.
Ok.
> TODO: Constrain 'perl(Test::More)' with '>= 0.98' (META.json:38).
Ok.
> TODO: I recommend unsetting AUTHOR_TESTING environment variable in the %check
> section (t/00.compile.t:37).
Ok.
$ rpmlint perl-YAML-LibYAML-API.spec
../SRPMS/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012-1.fc35.src.rpm
../RPMS/x86_64/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-*
4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint is Ok.
> FIX: Do not run-require 'libyaml'. The dependency is automatically generated
> from a library SONAME (libyaml-0.so.2()(64bit)).
> TODO: Constrain 'perl(YAML::PP::Common)' dependency with '>= 0.024'
> (Makefile.PL:32). Upstream probably mistaken the two modules.
$ rpm -q --requires -p
../RPMS/x86_64/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq
-c
1 libc.so.6()(64bit)
1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.11)(64bit)
1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit)
1 libperl.so.5.32()(64bit)
1 libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
1 libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
1 libyaml-0.so.2()(64bit)
1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.1)
1 perl(strict)
1 perl(warnings)
1 perl(XSLoader)
1 perl(YAML::PP::Common) >= 0.024
1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1
1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1
1 rtld(GNU_HASH)
Binary requires are Ok.
$ resolvedeps rawhide
../RPMS/x86_64/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm
Binary dependencies are resolvable. Ok.
It still fails to build in F35
. The full error
message as seen in my machine is:
Problém: problem with installed package redhat-rpm-config-183-1.fc35.noarch
- cannot install the best update candidate for package
redhat-rpm-config-183-1.fc35.noarch
- package redhat-rpm-config-183-1.fc35.noarch requires (annobin if (gcc or
clang)), but none of the providers can be installed
- cannot install the best update candidate for package
annobin-9.65-2.fc35.x86_64
- package annobin-docs-9.66-2.fc35.noarch obsoletes annobin < 9.66-2.fc35
provided by annobin-9.65-2.fc35.x86_64
- problem with installed package gcc-11.0.1-0.4.fc35.x86_64
- cannot install the best update candidate for package
gcc-11.0.1-0.4.fc35.x86_64
This seems to be an annobin bug #1949570.
Resolution: Package APPROVED.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of C
[Bug 1795461] Review Request: practrand - Software package for the Randon number generation & testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795461 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) changed: What|Removed |Added Status|POST|CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2021-04-16 10:14:22 --- Comment #24 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) --- Sounds good. This ticket can be closed. (You can also mention the bug id in bodhi, and it'll automatically close the bug when the update goes stable) -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1795461] Review Request: practrand - Software package for the Randon number generation & testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1795461 --- Comment #23 from Jiri Hladky --- The rawhide package was successfully created. I have created packages for F32, F33, F34, and epel7, and epel8 and submitted them to bodhi. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-8228f43268 https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2021-55fd7ff3fd https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-320f9492ce https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-9fac10904f https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-f9297de48e -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948651] Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651 --- Comment #2 from Jitka Plesnikova --- Update files on the same place. -- 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
[Bug 1948651] Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651 --- Comment #1 from Petr Pisar --- A standalone spec file differs from the packaged one. I will use packaged one for this review. URL and Source0 addresses are usable. Ok. TODO: Remove a trailing slash for the URL value. Source0 archive (SHA-512: e072d836d2af63200617025e21895c235ea0a81e5e1a719baa114184450a9e09eccf2642ddfb9ea4ad062c6f995aedc1aca5f467b684d173683573f3d0fab340) is original. Ok. Summary verified from lib/YAML/LibYAML/API.pm. Ok. Description verified from lib/YAML/LibYAML/API.pm. Ok. The packages contains an XS code, the package is full-arch. Ok. License verified from lib/YAML/LibYAML/API.pm, LibYAML/ppport.h, Makefile.PL, LICENSE, README. Ok. TODO: Document in the spec file a license of the bundled ./LibYAML files. It's a MIT license. FIX: Do not build-require 'libyaml'. The packages only uses libyaml-devel. FIX: Do not build-require 'perl(YAML::PP)'. It's used nowhere. TODO: Constrain 'perl(YAML::PP::Common)' build-dependency with '>= 0.024' (Makefile.PL:32). Upstream probably mistaken the two modules. TODO: Constrain 'perl(Test::More)' with '>= 0.98' (META.json:38). TODO: I recommend unsetting AUTHOR_TESTING environment variable in the %check section (t/00.compile.t:37). All tests pass. Ok. $ rpmlint perl-YAML-LibYAML-API.spec ../SRPMS/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012-1.fc35.src.rpm ../RPMS/x86_64/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-* 4 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpm -q -lv -p ../RPMS/x86_64/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib/.build-id drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/ea lrwxrwxrwx1 root root 70 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib/.build-id/ea/751a0c94108058f8599a4705ba31c83968a01d -> ../../../../usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/YAML/LibYAML/API/XS/XS.so drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/YAML drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/YAML/LibYAML drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/YAML/LibYAML/API -rw-r--r--1 root root 5101 Sep 8 2020 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/YAML/LibYAML/API.pm -rw-r--r--1 root root 312 Sep 8 2020 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/YAML/LibYAML/API/XS.pm drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/YAML drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/YAML/LibYAML drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/YAML/LibYAML/API drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/YAML/LibYAML/API/XS -rwxr-xr-x1 root root31768 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/lib64/perl5/vendor_perl/auto/YAML/LibYAML/API/XS/XS.so drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/share/doc/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API -rw-r--r--1 root root 1533 Sep 8 2020 /usr/share/doc/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API/Changes -rw-r--r--1 root root 374 Sep 8 2020 /usr/share/doc/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API/README drwxr-xr-x2 root root0 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/share/licenses/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API -rw-r--r--1 root root18349 Sep 8 2020 /usr/share/licenses/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API/LICENSE -rw-r--r--1 root root 1918 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/share/man/man3/YAML::LibYAML::API.3pm.gz -rw-r--r--1 root root 1128 Apr 16 11:00 /usr/share/man/man3/YAML::LibYAML::API::XS.3pm.gz File layout and permissions are Ok. $ rpm -q --requires -p ../RPMS/x86_64/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm | sort -f | uniq -c 1 libc.so.6()(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.11)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.4)(64bit) 1 libperl.so.5.32()(64bit) 1 libpthread.so.0()(64bit) 1 libpthread.so.0(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) 1 libyaml >= 0.2.5 1 libyaml-0.so.2()(64bit) 1 perl(:MODULE_COMPAT_5.32.1) 1 perl(strict) 1 perl(warnings) 1 perl(XSLoader) 1 perl(YAML::PP::Common) 1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 1 rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 1 rpmlib(PayloadIsZstd) <= 5.4.18-1 1 rtld(GNU_HASH) FIX: Do not run-require 'libyaml'. The dependency is automatically generated from a library SONAME (libyaml-0.so.2()(64bit)). TODO: Constrain 'perl(YAML::PP::Common)' dependency with '>= 0.024' (Makefile.PL:32). Upstream probably mistaken the two modules. $ rpm -q --provides -p ../RPMS/x86_64/perl-YAML-LibYAML-API-0.012-1.fc35.x86_64.rpm | s
[Bug 1949633] Review Request: python-pick - pick an option in the terminal with a simple GUI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1949633
--- Comment #1 from Karolina Surma ---
Hi,
I have a few comments regarding the package.
- The most important issue is build requiring python3dist(nose) as a test
runner. nose is deprecated and it must not be pulled by the new packages.
You could ask the upstream to replace it or use a different test runner for
this package (for details see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DeprecateNose)
- Also please note that no tests were actually run in the %check section.
See relevant part of the build.log:
Executing(%check): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Uxucbx
+ umask 022
+ cd /builddir/build/BUILD
+ cd pick-1.0.0
+ /usr/bin/python3 setup.py test
running test
WARNING: Testing via this command is deprecated and will be removed in a future
version. Users looking for a generic test entry point independent of test
runner are encouraged to use tox.
running egg_info
(...)
running build_ext
--
Ran 0 tests in 0.000s
- The rpmlint warning should be fixed.
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable
Issues:
===
- Package must not depend on deprecated() packages.
Note: python3-nose is deprecated, you must not depend on it.
See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
guidelines/deprecating-packages/
= 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.
Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
found: "Expat License", "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Expat
License". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
licensecheck in /home/ksurma/tmp/1949633-python-pick/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: 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: 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 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 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.
[-]: 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- prefi
[Bug 1948651] Review Request: perl-YAML-LibYAML-API - Wrapper around the C libyaml library
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1948651 Petr Pisar changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||ppi...@redhat.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ppi...@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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
